On August 7, 2019, in Pantovich v. State, the South Carolina Supreme Court revisited our state’s “good character alone” instruction which required trial judges to instruct jurors: Good character evidence alone may create a reasonable doubt as to the commission of the crime charged. Thus, under some circumstances, a person might be entitled to a verdict […]
On August 7, 2019, the South Carolina Supreme Court vacated a murder conviction, granted post-conviction relief (“PCR”), and ordered a new trial in State v. Felder. Felder’s trial counsel did not object when the prosecution introduced a summary of Felder’s statement that mentioned “he was currently on bond for a lynching charge.” “After weighing trial […]
In Mangal v. State, our Supreme Court allowed a conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC) with a minor to stand in the face of a disturbing combination of ineffective assistance of trial and post-conviction relief (PCR) counsel. Mangal’s trial counsel failed to object to expert testimony that improperly bolstered the testimony of the child, and […]
In State v. King, our Supreme Court rejected prosecutors’ contention that attempted murder is a general intent, rather than a specific intent crime. This holding, predictably, resulted from our Court’s review of its precedent and the legislative history of the Sentencing Reform Act of 2010. Prosecutors attempted to equate attempted murder to the common law offense […]
On November 5, 2014, the South Carolina Court of Appeals decided Bell v. State (Opinion No. 5277), holding that Bell’s lawyer was ineffective for not telling him about a guilty plea offer. In his post-conviction relief (PCR) hearing, Bell testified that he would have pleaded guilty and not have taken a jury to trial, had […]
On March 19, 2014, the South Carolina Court of Appeals decided Abney v. State, holding trial counsel employed a legitimate trial strategy by not requesting the trial court judge instruct the jurors about the lesser-included offense. The all-or-nothing approach failed, and the jurors convicted Abney of armed robbery without ever having the opportunity to consider […]
On February 5, 2014, the South Carolina Court of Appeals decided Smith v. State, holding that trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting when the prosecutor failed to honor the plea agreement. Smith, originally charged with murder, pleaded guilty to the lesser-included offense of voluntary manslaughter. Under the plea agreement, the Solicitor was not supposed […]
On January 29, 2014, the South Carolina Court of Appeals decided Sullivan v. State, holding, “Because there was no evidence Sullivan fired a gun unintentionally, he was not entitled to a jury charge on involuntary manslaughter.” Sullivan, in a post-conviction relief (PCR) action, alleged his trial counsel was ineffective for not requesting a full and […]
2013 was a major year in criminal law for the South Carolina Supreme Court. Interviews in Child Sexual Abuse Cases – In January 2013, our Supreme Court decided State v. Kromah, hopefully putting to rest prosecution attempts to improperly bolster child witnesses in criminal sexual conduct cases. Kromah is the most recent of numerous cases […]
On June 19, 2013, the South Carolina Supreme decided the Post Conviction Relief (PCR) case of Taylor v. State and, in the process, approved a life without parole (LWOP) sentence for a man who would have been better served to resolve all of his charges in multiple counties at the same time. Taylor had charges […]
For Charles Grose, being a defense attorney is an opportunity to help people in tough situations — protecting their rights and helping them avoid unfair or unjust charges and criminal penalties.
In addition to helping defendants fight charges they aren’t guilty of, Mr. Grose strives to reveal the total circumstances of each client’s situation and demonstrate to police and prosecutors the mitigating circumstances and often show an alleged crime is not as serious as previously thought.