The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1922-11-09
FORM OF
COURT PROCEDURE
TO PREVENT MAN WITH PLEN-
Tl OF MONEY" FROM DE-
FEATING JUSTICE.

4 new QOClrlne Ol dppediS olI dAI-
er-discovered evidence in criminal
cases was enunciated by the state
supreme court at Columbia last Fri
day in affirming an order of Circuit
Judge Mauldin granting a new trial
to Cliff Hawkins. convicted at Green
Vile of murder and sentenced to be
electrocuted.
The poinion was written by Judge
Frank B. Gary, of the Eighth Ju-
dicial Circuit and was concurred in
by four justices of the supreme court
and the circuit judges sitting en-
banc on September l, at which sit
ting the Hawkins case was reviewed.
Associates Justice R. c. Watts dis
'senting.
The opinion holds that motions
for new trials on after discovered
evidence should be made to circuit
courts or judges when they have not
been deprived of jurisdiction by ap-
peals to the supreme court through
the handing down of remittitur by
that tribunal; but, if the case is
pending in the appellate court, mo-
ton should be made to it to suspend
the appeal so that the motion for a
new trial can be heard before the
lower court. The opinion likewise
holds that, if the supreme court has
already passed on the appeal, and
its judgment has been remanded to
the lower court, then an appeal on
after discovered evidence must be
heard before the supreme court, and
if the cause is meritorious that trlbu-
nal will take proper steps to have
the motion heard by the circuit court.
Should the date for an electrocu-
ton already have been set, the opin-
ion holds, then an appeal to the su-
preme court should be made in suf-
fcient time on the grounds of after
discovered evidence; but, if the time
is limited, the governor can be re-
quested to extend the date Of the
sentence, upon proper showing, and
the appellate court will hear the mo-
tion anyway, and, should the appeal
be refused, there will be no necessity
of returning to the lower court to
set a new date for electrocution.
The rule heretofore has been that,
should the motion for new trial be
refused by the circuit judge, then an
appeal would be taken to the state
supreme which must hear it. Should
the circuit court be affirmed in its
judgment and the appellant be sent
back for re-sentence, he could then
make another motion for new trial,
and again appeal from the refusal
of the circuit judge, and continue this
almost interminably, so much SO that
the dictum, "a man with sufficient
money to continue hiring lawyers, if
convicted of murder and sentenced
to death, need never to be executed"
has almost become a legal maxim in
South Carolina. However, the new
doctrine laid down by the court will
prevent this.
The dftrine of appeals under
which the courts have been laboring,
as laid down in the state against Lee,
and interpreted in subsequent cases,
"has led to a condition" in the Ian
guage of the opinion, "where con-
victed criminals may by successive
motions and appeals block the pro-
cess of the law indefinitely, and by
their motions and appeals prevent
their execution"
This condition has been confront
ing the law enforcement department
of the government for some time, so
much so that in several notorious
cases substantial justice has been
thwarted.