 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hill5/11/2004
al to the issue of guilt or innocence; and (5) is not merely cumulative or impeaching." Id. at 507, 427 S.E.2d at 668-69.
Because we reverse and remand on Hill's issue involving Rule 5 and Brady, we need not address this issue. See Mixon, 275 S.C. at 582, 274 S.E.2d at 409 (comparing relief sought in Brady motion to motion for new trial on the ground of after-discovered evidence); see also State v. Spann, 334 S.C. 618, 619, 513 S.E.2d 98, 99 (1999) (wherein the Supreme Court, because it reversed and granted a new trial on one issue, did not address other issues raised by appellant).
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing analysis, we find the disclosure rules of Brady and Rule 5 are applicable in probation revocation cases. As such, we reverse the circuit court's decision denying Hill access to this information prior to the revocation hearing and remand for a de novo revocation hearing. Finally, we affirm Hill's issues regarding 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Rules 28 and 29 of the South Carolina Rules of Criminal Procedure.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 South Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|