Rice v. State

CourtListener 10148621ScctappOct 15, 2014

Full text

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Russell W. Rice, Jr., Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2011-186254

Appeal From Greenville County
C. Victor Pyle, Jr., Trial Court Judge

Appeal From Greenville County
Robin B. Stilwell, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-361
Heard September 8, 2014 – Filed October 15, 2014

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Karen Christine Ratigan, both of
Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Russell W. Rice appeals the post-conviction relief court's denial
of his claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. On appeal, Rice claims his
counsel was ineffective for failing to conduct an independent investigation of the
alleged murder weapon found in Rice's vehicle. We affirm pursuant to Rule
220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S.
668, 687 (1984) (stating to prove trial counsel was ineffective, the defendant must
show (1) trial counsel's performance was deficient and (2) the deficiency
prejudiced the defendant); Lounds v. State, 380 S.C. 454, 462, 670 S.E.2d 646, 650
(2008) (stating when trial counsel has a valid reason for employing a certain
strategy, it is not deemed to be ineffective assistance of counsel); Frasier v. State,
306 S.C. 158, 160-61, 410 S.E.2d 572, 573 (1991) (holding trial counsel's failure to
procure an expert witness was not unreasonable under prevailing professional
norms where counsel vigorously cross-examined and attacked the accuracy of the
evidence); Cherry v. State, 300 S.C. 115, 119, 386 S.E.2d 624, 626 (1989) (holding
the appropriate scope of review is that any evidence of probative value is sufficient
to support the findings of the PCR court).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, SHORT, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.