Mangal v. State
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
JUSTICE FEW:
Farid A. Mangal was convicted of criminal sexual conduct with a minor, lewd act upon a child, and incest. After his convictions were affirmed, Mangal filed this action for post-conviction relief (PCR). He argues trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to improper bolstering testimony. The PCR court refused to rule on the improper bolstering issue because the court found Mangal did not raise it in his PCR application or at the PCR hearing. The court of appeals reversed, finding the improper bolstering issue was raised to the PCR court. The court of appeals then proceeded to…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Martinez v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Napue v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Aice v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Brannon v. WilliamsDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2020
- Brannon v. WilliamsDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2019
- Derrick Miller v. StateCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2026
- Dominic A. Leggette v. StateCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2023
- Fortune v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2019
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.