Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1990

State v. O'LEARY

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided June 18, 1990 · Chandler, Gregory, Harwell, Finney, Toal

393 S.E.2d 186; 302 S.C. 17; 1990 S.C. LEXIS 114 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

11 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Simmons (S.C. Ct. App. 2006)
State v. Spann (S.C. Ct. App. 2003)
In re Lee (S.C. 2006)
State v. Peppers (S.C. 2001)
Edwards v. State (S.C. 2004)
State v. Graddick (S.C. Ct. App. 2007)
State v. Howell (S.C. Ct. App. 2007)
State v. Downs (S.C. 2004)
Easter v. State (S.C. 2003)
State v. Wilkins (S.C. Ct. App. 1992)
Shumpert v. South Carolina Department of Highways & Public Transportation (S.C. 1991)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Chandler, Justice:

Appellant, Thomas Lee O’Leary (O’Leary) pled guilty to driving under suspension (DUS) in violation of S.C. Code Ann. § 56-1-460 (Supp. 1989). The trial Court permitted O’Leary to condition his guilty plea upon the right to appeal

*18 the constitutionality of S.C. Code Ann. § 56-1-360 (1976), 1 regarding notice to drivers whose licenses are suspended. This was error; we reverse.

Guilty pleas are unconditional and, if an accused attempts to attach any condition, the trial Court must direct a plea of not guilty. State v. Truesdale, 278 S.C. 368, 296 S.E. (2d) 528 (1982). It is, thus, impermissible for a defendant to preserve constitutional issues while entertaining á guilty plea; the trial Court may not accept the plea on such terms. Id.

We reverse and remand for new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Gregory, C J., and Harwell, Finney and Toal, JJ., concur.

This section was amended subsequent to O’Leary’s plea by 198 No. 169, § 1, effective June 8, 1989. See, § 56-1-360 (Supp. 1989).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.