Legal Opinion
In the Matter of Jeffrey Allen Chapman
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided February 15, 2017No. Appellate Case 2014-001181; Opinion 27705PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JUSTICE HEARN:
A Greenville County jury found Jeffrey Chapman met the statutory definition of a sexually violent predator (SVP) as set forth in South Carolina’s Sexually Violent Predator Act (the Act),1 and the trial court subsequently signed an order to civilly commit Chapman. In this direct appeal, Chapman presents a novel issue of law related to the right to counsel in SVP proceedings. We hold that persons committed as SVPs have a right to the effective assistance of counsel, and they may effectuate that right by seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Therefore, although we affirm Chapman’s…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Vitek v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Grado v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 2018
- In re BraddySupreme Court of Missouri · 2018
- Winnebago Cnty. v. J.M. (In Re Mental Commitment of J.M.)Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2018
- Keene v. CNA Holdings, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2019
- In the Matter of BiltonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.