Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hayden v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 26, 1983No. 21861Published

1DissentHarwell, Justice

I respectfully dissent.

Five years after respondent’s conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, he filed an amended application for post-conviction relief. He alleged he was entitled to a new trial on the ground of after-discovered evidence. At his original trial respondent contended that SLED agents had planted him with drugs in order to discredit his upcoming testimony in federal court against Leonard Horger, a paid SLED informant. The SLED agents and police officers testified respondent’s allegations were false. However, at respondent’s post-conviction relief hearing,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. IrvinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1978
  2. State v. HamSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1977
  3. State v. CaskeySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1979
  4. Greene v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. DeAngelisSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1971

1 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