Court Opinion

ID: 9572473
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:41:57.196821+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:33:11.027649
License: Public Domain

Littlejohn and Gregory, Justices
(concurring) :
We concur in the result of the per curiam opinion of Chief Justice Lewis and Mr. Justice Ness but on the record before us deem it unnecessary and inappropriate to overrule either Cross or Beaver.
There has been no application in keeping with the rules of this Court to attack, modify or overrule either opinion which followed the generally accepted law and the minimum standards for Criminal Justice of the American Bar Association when issued.
The effect of our brothers’ view would be to adopt a new concept of the standards and overrule our own decisions. A new rule as far reaching as that proposed should take place only after notification to the Attorney General and interested members of both bench and bar and fully briefed for this Court.
*258Here, we simply hold the trial judge’s finding that the plea was voluntary is amply supported by the record. McCall v. State, 258 S. C. 463, 189 S. E. (2d) 6 (1972). We, too, would affirm.