James D. Robertson, Petitioner v. State of South Carolina, Resp — Pleicones, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting…

Summary

Chief Justice Pleicones concurring in part and dissenting in part agreed with the majority on the Martinez issue and the analysis of S.C. Code Ann. § 17‑27‑160(B), but dissented on the requirement that a capital post‑conviction relief (PCR) applicant must show Strickland‑type prejudice to obtain relief for a statutory violation. He argued that the legislature’s procedural safeguards should be strictly honored and that a PCR applicant must be appointed counsel meeting the statutory qualifications without a prejudice analysis.