Hinton v. South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole & Pardon Services

(concurring in result):.

I concur in the result reached by the majority, that an Ohio conviction for the crime of abduction does not qualify as a *343second or subsequent conviction under S.C.Code Ann. § 24-21-640 (Supp.2002), a statute that prohibits the Board of South Carolina Probation, Parole and Pardon Services from granting a parole to a “prisoner serving a second or subsequent conviction ... for violent crimes as defined in Section 16-1-60.” I simply differ with the majority in how we should arrive at that conclusion.

The respondent Jack L. Hinton, a prisoner serving a sentence for…