Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Morris

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 14, 2008No. 26418Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Pleicones

I concur in the majority’s decision to affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences, but write separately because I view several of the issues differently than does the majority. I have addressed the issues in the same order.

I agree that appellant was not entitled to immunity because he was not compelled to provide the State with self-incriminating information. State v. Thrift, 312 S.C. 282, 440 S.E.2d 341 (1994). I do not join that part of the majority opinion which advises investigators to impart Miranda warnings where they are not otherwise required

I agree that the jury instruction given…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. ThriftSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
  2. Smith v. HaynsworthSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
  3. Talley v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2007
  4. State v. ThompkinsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1975
  5. State v. MeansSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API