U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1973

Jesse Lee Wood v. State of South Carolina

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 13, 1973 · Boreman, Craven, Butzner

483 F.2d 149; 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 8781 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Ann Beddingfield, Third Year Student (Barry Nakell, Chapel Hill, N. C., [Court-appointed counsel] on brief) for appellant., Emmet H. Clair, Asst. Atty. Gen., of S. C. (Daniel R. McLeod, Atty. Gen. of S. C., and Robert M. Ariail, Asst. Atty. Gen., of S. C., on brief) for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

William James Rummel v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent (5th Cir. 1978)
Dewey Hart v. Ira M. Coiner, Warden of the West Virginia State Penitentiary (4th Cir. 1973)
Davis v. Davis (4th Cir. 1978)
Rummel v. Estelle (Supreme Court of the United States 1980)
William James Rummel v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent (5th Cir. 1978)
Queen v. Leeke (District Court, D. South Carolina 1978)
Dennison v. Leeke (District Court, D. South Carolina 1978)
United States v. Grimsley (4th Cir. 2002)
Davis v. Davis (4th Cir. 1978)
Arthur A. Hall, Jr. v. Arthur L. McKenzie Warden of the West Virginia State Penitentiary (4th Cir. 1976)

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Wood was sentenced by a South Carolina state court to concurrent terms of five years’ imprisonment on his pleas' of guilty to two counts of making obscene telephone calls in violation of S.C.Code Ann. § 16-552.1 (Supp. 1971).

The only issue presented us on this appeal from the district court’s denial of habeas corpus relief is whether the sentences imposed upon Wood are so excessive and disproportionate as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the eighth amendment.

The sentences given Wood were within the rather startling ten-year maximum allowed by South Carolina law. S.C.Code Ann. § 17-552 (Supp. 1971) ; 1 State v. Hill, 254 S.C. 321, 175 S.E.2d 227, 232 (1970). The sentencing judge was doubtless influenced, and properly so, by Wood’s prior criminal record. 2

Whatever may be our subjective view of the matter, we fail to discern here objective factors establishing dispropor-tionality in violation of the eighth amendment. See Hart v. Coiner, 483 F. 2d 136 (4th Cir. 1973), decided today.

The decision of the district court will therefore be

Affirmed.

. Until amended in 1967, maximum incarceration was six months. S.C.Code Ann. § 16-552.1 (1962).

. Wood was serving a sentence for burglary at the time he placed the calls. His prior record included convictions for larceny and automobile theft.

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