Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Joseph v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided October 14, 2002No. 25539Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Burnett

I agree petitioner knowingly and voluntarily entered a guilty plea to murder and the murder indictment was sufficient to confer subject matter jurisdiction. I disagree grand larceny is not a lesser included offense of armed robbery. In my opinion, grand larceny is a lesser included offense of armed robbery and, therefore, the trial judge had subject matter jurisdiction to accept petitioner’s guilty plea to grand larceny. Accordingly, I would reverse the post-conviction relief (PCR) judge’s order.

The circuit court has subject matter jurisdiction to convict a defendant of an offense if 1) there…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State v. PrimusSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  2. State v. BrownSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1979
  3. State v. AustinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1989
  4. State v. ScipioSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1984
  5. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API