Multiple offenses in different counties
ln Bryant v. State, the S.C. Supreme Court held that three armed robberies committed within a 54 hour period are not "so closely connected in point of time that they may be considered as one offense" for purposes of the life without parole (LWOP) statutes (17-25-45 and 17-25-50). I think that the Court's reading of the statutes is correct.
Crimes that are classified as "serious" come under the "three strikes" law - 3 convictions and you get LWOP. Crimes that are classified as "most serious" come under the "two strikes" law - 2 convictions and you get LWOP.
The original 17-25-45 made sense - it said that a "serious" or "most serious" crime that occurred after a person had previously been sentenced for a "serious" or "most serious" crime would count as their second or third strike. The current version of 17-25-45 requires only that a person be convicted of a "serious" or "most serious" crime before the current conviction/sentence. This creates one way to avoid a LWOP sentence - if you have multiple charges pending, and you plead to them at the same time, they are not considered multiple offenses for purposes of LWOP. But, iIf you plead guilty to one "serious" offense, and then plead guilty a week later to a second "serious" offense, you get LWOP.
17-25-50 provides another way to avoid LWOP, and says that "the court shall treat as one offense any number of offenses which have been committed at times so closely connected in point of time that they may be considered as one offense, notwithstanding under the law they constitute separate and distinct offenses."
Although Bryant was on a crime spree that seems like it should be considered one event, the armed robberies happened on different days - the SCSCt felt that this did not qualify under 17-25-50. The real problem in Bryant's case is his attorneys. He was charged in three different counties and probably had three different attorneys at the trial level, although I do not know who represented him.
Bryant pled guilty in July, 1997 to the Colleton and Jasper armed robberies and was sentenced to 10 years. If these were the only two armed robberies, they would count as a single conviction under 17-25-45 and not trigger the LWOP statute, because he pled to both at the same time. It was possible to plead to both at the same time because, although they occurred in two separate counties, Colleton and Jasper Counties are both in one judicial circuit, the 14th. But there was the third armed robbery also pending in Orangeburg - in December, 1997 Bryant pled guilty to the third robbery in Orangeburg County, which made him eligible for LWOP (armed robbery is a "most serious" offense and comes under the "two strikes" law), and his attorney did not question the LWOP sentence as he stood next to Bryant in the courtroom.
Why the hell would an attorney plead someone to life in prison without parole in a non-death penalty case? What are they going to do if he goes to trial and loses, sentence him to life and then a little bit more? There was nothing to lose by trying this case, and everything to gain no matter how slim the chance of victory - my opinion is that the attorney who would plead his client to LWOP needs to be in a different profession or at least practicing a different type of law.
The second problem which may not be as obvious is the lack of coordination between the circuits. I would not fault the first attorney who pled two counts of armed robbery to the minimum sentence of 10 years, assuming that the state had a strong case, but ideally all three cases should have been coordinated. The prosecutor must file a notice of intent to seek LWOP, and a non-LWOP sentence potentially could have been negotiated in Orangeburg in consideration of the first plea. My question - did the defense attorney in either location attempt to contact the other defense attorney or prosecutor?
Bryant probably gives a correct reading of the LWOP statutes, but more importantly I think that it gives an excellent example of bad lawyering and how it can cost someone their life.
