Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Gentry

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 7, 2005No. 25949Published

1DissentJustice Pleicones

I respectfully dissent.

I agree with the majority that the question of the sufficiency of an indictment is not a matter of subject matter jurisdiction, and that in this case the indictments, while flawed, were sufficient to confer jurisdiction. I write separately, however, because in my view the circuit court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to conduct a trial of a criminal charge where there has been no presentment of an indictment by the grand jury. See State v. Evans, 307 S.C. 477, 415 S.E.2d 816 (1992) (valid indictment or waiver of presentment prerequisite for circuit court’s subject…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. LeonardSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  2. State v. EvansSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
  3. State v. BramlettSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1932
  4. State v. GatesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1977
  5. State v. SmithSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993

3 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