Hiott v. State
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Justice BEATTY:
Milton Hiott’s application for post-conviction relief (PCR) was denied. The PCR judge found Hiott’s testimony and claims were frivolous and sanctioned him $3,000 pursuant to Rule 11 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding as a matter of first impres sion that Rule 11 is applicable in PCR proceedings. Hiott v. State, 375 S.C. 354, 652 S.E.2d 436 (Ct.App.2007). We granted Hiott’s petition for a writ of certiorari and now reverse.
I. FACTS
Hiott was convicted of incest with his daughter after a two-day criminal trial on January 16 and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Aice v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
- Pierce v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
- Wade v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
- Page v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Brown v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2009
- Kinard v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2016