Legal Opinion

State v. Payne

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided July 20, 1998No. 2873PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOWARD, Justice:

This cases raises the fundamental question of whether the State or the defendant bears the burden of proof when the defendant collaterally attacks a prior conviction which the State seeks to use under a sentence enhancement statute. Robert Payne was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) second offense and sentenced to six months imprisonment. Payne appeals the enhancement of his sentence arguing he should have been sentenced as a first offender because his prior DUI conviction was uncounseled and he was not warned of the dangers of self-representation. We affirm. 1

I.…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Medina v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Parke v. RaleySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Nichols v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Nash v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1999
  2. v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 2020
  3. United States v. Guerrero-RobledoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009
  4. United States v. Pino GonzalezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
  5. State v. GroomsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000

2 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