Case ID: sc_296/html/0480-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

22928
    The STATE, Respondent v. Milton E. COTO, Appellant.
    (374 S. E. (2d) 181)
    Supreme Court
    
      John D. Kassel, of Suggs & Kelly, P.A., Columbia, on behalf of A.C.L.U. of the South Carolina Foundation, for appellant.
    
    
      T. Travis Medlock, Atty. Gen., Harold M. Coombs, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Gwendolyn L. Fuller, Staff Atty. and James C. Anders, Sol, Columbia, for respondent.
    
    
      Heard Oct. 21, 1988.
    Decided Nov. 28, 1988.
   Per Curiam:

The record does not indicate, and no determination was made, that Appellant’s waiver of counsel was knowing and intelligent. Accordingly, the case is reversed and remanded for a new trial. State v. Bateman,_S. C__, 373 S. E. (2d) 470 (1988); see also Faretta v. California, 422 U. S. 806, 95 S. Ct. 2525, 45 L. Ed. (2d) 562 (1975); Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U. S. 708, 68 S. Ct. 316, 92 L. Ed. 309 (1948).

Reversed and remanded.