Legal Opinion

Wolfe v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 12, 1997No. 24614PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TOAL, Justice:

In this action for Post-Conviction Relief (“PCR,”), the PCR court granted relief to William Wolfe based on ineffective assistance of counsel at Wolfe’s guilty plea proceeding. We reverse.

Factual/Procedural Background

In early 1994, Wolfe was indicted for assault and battery with intent to kill (“ABIK”) and possession of a firearm or knife during the commission of a violent crime. The case was called for trial in May 1 994. During the pre-trial motion hearing, the trial judge refused to grant Wolfe a continuance to get a mental evaluation and also indicated, though without ruling…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Cherry v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1989
  4. Butler v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
  5. McCray v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Roddy v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
  2. State v. RiveraSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2013
  3. Moorehead v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
  4. Roscoe v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
  5. Holden v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011

15 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