Court cases about hands of one is the hands of all in South Carolina?
Full Question:
court cases about hands of one is the hands of all. were the defendant wins
02/04/2017 |
Category: Criminal |
State: South Carolina |
#31534
Answer:
Criminal law in South Carolina recognizes a form of accomplice liability commonly referred to as the “hand of one, hand of all.” This is where a person who participates in a crime with another person or group of people can be charged with some or all the crimes committed by the other person or group as if the person participated in the separate crimes.
There are 72 plus cases in South Carolina that mention the "hand of one, is the hand of all". Below you will fine a list of 20 opinions that address the doctrine and after that the most cited cases in South Carolina that address the issue. We could not order by who won in each of the opinions below.
1. State v. Pritchett, 122116 SCCA, 2016-UP-523
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina December 21, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...unlawful carrying of a pistol charge when the hand of one is the hand of all theory was charged
to
2. State v. Johnson, 111616 SCCA, 5456
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina November 16, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...police officer, (3) instructing the jury concerning "the hand of one is the hand of all" because the
evidence did
3. State v. Myers, 062216 SCCA, 2016-UP-321
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina June 22, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...trial court erred in charging the jury "the hand of one is the hand of all": State v. Brandt, 393
4. State v. Upson, 060116 SCCA, 2016-UP-237
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina June 1, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...2d 320, 324 (Ct. App. 2002) ("Under the 'hand of one is the hand of all' theory, one who joins
5. State v. Butler, 042016 SCCA, 2016-UP-181
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina April 20, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...1981) (stating that to admit evidence under the "hand of one is the hand of all" theory, "the
existence of
6. State v. Smith, 022416 SCCA, 2016-UP-073
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina February 24, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...erred by (1) charging the jury on the "hand of one is the hand of all" theory of accomplice liability
7. State v. Manigan, 012016 SCCA, 2016-UP-022
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina January 20, 2016 0
______________________________________________________________________
...guilt and (2) charging the jury that "the hand of one is the hand of all" because the investigating
officer
8. 780 S.E.2d 892 (S.C. 2015), 27562, State v. Larmand
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 780 S.E.2d 892, 415 S.C. 23 December 23, 2015 5
______________________________________________________________________
...on the existence of a conspiracy under the " hand of one is the hand of all" theory.---------
9. State v. Benjamin, 121615 SCCA, 2015-UP-554
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina December 16, 2015 0
______________________________________________________________________
...accomplice liability arises from the theory that 'the hand of one is the hand of all.'"), cert. denied,
135 S
10. State v. Larmand, 081215 SCSC, 27562
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina August 12, 2015 0
______________________________________________________________________
...on the existence of a conspiracy under the "hand of one is the hand of all" theory.---------
11. 776 S.E.2d 387 (S.C.App. 2015), 5332, State v. Harry
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 776 S.E.2d 387, 413 S.C. 534 July 22, 2015 0
______________________________________________________________________
...Kareem Harry appeals his murder conviction under the hand of one is the hand of all theory of
accomplice liability
12. State v. Holder, 060315 SCCA, 2015-UP-273
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina June 3, 2015 0
______________________________________________________________________
...2d 904, 910 (2014) (stating that under the "hand of one is the hand of all" theory of accomplice
liability
13. State v. Allison, 121714 SCCA, 2014-UP-473
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina December 17, 2014 0
______________________________________________________________________
...only if the jury was also charged "the hand of one is the hand of all" law because the State
14. Sanders v. State, 121714 SCSC, 2014-MO-049
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina December 17, 2014 0
______________________________________________________________________
...2d 98, 101 (1999) ("Under this theory [the hand of one is the hand of all], one who joins with
15. 765 S.E.2d 841 (S.C.App. 2014), 5278, State v. Jackson
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 765 S.E.2d 841, 410 S.C. 584 November 5, 2014 1
______________________________________________________________________
...murder under the accomplice liability doctrine of the hand of one is the hand of all. Under the
hand of
16. State v. Hunsberger, 110514 SCCA, 2014-UP-381
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina November 5, 2014 0
______________________________________________________________________
...s theory rested on the theory of "the hand of one is the hand of all" and the witnesses' memories
17. State v. Hollis, 080614 SCCA, 2014-UP-319
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina August 6, 2014 0
______________________________________________________________________
...05 (Ct. App. 2007) (stating that "under the hand of one is the hand of all theory [of accomplice
liability
18. State v. Reese, 073014 SCCA, 2014-UP-300
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina July 30, 2014 0
______________________________________________________________________
...on her co-defendant's actions "under the hand of one is the hand of all theory, " was engaged in
19. 758 S.E.2d 904 (S.C. 2014), 27407, State v. Reid
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 758 S.E.2d 904, 408 S.C. 461 July 2, 2014 5
______________________________________________________________________
...could be convicted under the theory of " the hand of one is the hand of all." The trial court denied
20. State v. Canty, 060414 SCCA, 2014-UP-208
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina June 4, 2014 0
______________________________________________________________________
...the defendant could be found guilty under the hand of one is the hand of all accomplice liability
theory because
Here is a list of the most cited cases in South Carolina dealing the hand of one is the hand of all.
1. 502 S.E.2d 63 (S.C. 1998), 24801, State v. Kelsey
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 502 S.E.2d 63, 331 S.C. 50 June 8, 1998 99
______________________________________________________________________
...77] course the law also says that the hand of one is the hand of all. The law says--that
2. 485 S.E.2d 360 (S.C. 1997), 24608, State v. Byram
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 485 S.E.2d 360, 326 S.C. 107 April 28, 1997 37
______________________________________________________________________
...jury on mere presence, accomplice liability, and "the hand of one is the hand of all" during the
guilt phase
3. 562 S.E.2d 320 (S.C.App. 2002), 3471, State v. Condrey
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 562 S.E.2d 320, 349 S.C. 184 April 1, 2002 35
______________________________________________________________________
...Did the trial court err in charging the "hand of one is the hand of all" doctrine? III. Did the
4. 406 S.E.2d 165 (S.C. 1991), 23425, State v. Bell
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 406 S.E.2d 165, 305 S.C. 11 June 24, 1991 33
______________________________________________________________________
...Now, I'm going to charge you the hand of one is the hand of all. Now, as to the
5. 610 S.E.2d 859 (S.C.App. 2005), 3967, State v. Zeigler
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 610 S.E.2d 859, 364 S.C. 94 March 21, 2005 31
______________________________________________________________________
...something about being merely present in with the hand of one is the hand of all theory but I didn
6. 382 S.E.2d 911 (S.C. 1989), 23058, State v. Franklin
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 382 S.E.2d 911, 299 S.C. 133 August 14, 1989 31
______________________________________________________________________
...all and as it is sometimes said, the hand of one is the hand of all. Franklin contends that the
7. 697 S.E.2d 578 (S.C. 2010), 26853, State v. Mattison
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 697 S.E.2d 578, 388 S.C. 469 August 9, 2010 30
______________________________________________________________________
...S.E.2d 268, 269 (2000). " Under the ‘ hand of one is the hand of all’ theory, one who joins
8. 534 S.E.2d 268 (S.C. 2000), 25154, State v. Dickman
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 534 S.E.2d 268, 341 S.C. 293 June 19, 2000 23
______________________________________________________________________
...a theory of accomplice liability based on "the hand of one is the hand of all." SeeState v. Crowe
9. 277 S.E.2d 696 (S.C. 1981), 21442, State v. Woomer
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 277 S.E.2d 696, 276 S.C. 258 April 28, 1981 22
______________________________________________________________________
...C. 264] and under the theory that "the hand of one is the hand of all." The objection was
overruled
10. 397 S.E.2d 523 (S.C. 1990), 23285, Thrift v. State
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 397 S.E.2d 523, 302 S.C. 535 October 22, 1990 22
______________________________________________________________________
...of one is the act of all, the hand of one is the hand of all. If two or more
11. 672 S.E.2d 556 (S.C. 2009), 26582, State v. Mercer
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 672 S.E.2d 556, 381 S.C. 149 January 12, 2009 21
______________________________________________________________________
...charged, without objection, on the law of " the hand of one is the hand of all." In denying the
post-
12. 701 S.E.2d 766 (S.C.App. 2010), 4747, State v. Gibson
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 701 S.E.2d 766, 390 S.C. 347 September 29, 2010 20
______________________________________________________________________
...case to proceed to the jury on the " hand of one is the hand of all" theory of liability. Adams
13. 327 S.E.2d 650 (S.C. 1984), 22168, State v. Patterson
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 327 S.E.2d 650, 285 S.C. 5 October 10, 1984 20
______________________________________________________________________
...law Page 653 rule of murder that the hand of one is the hand of all. State v. Hicks, 257
14. 238 S.E.2d 680 (S.C. 1977), 20536, State v. Gates
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 238 S.E.2d 680, 269 S.C. 557 November 1, 1977 16
______________________________________________________________________
...of one is the act of all the hand of one is the hand of all." In support of the
15. 567 S.E.2d 523 (S.C.App. 2002), 3515, State v. Garrett
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 567 S.E.2d 523, 350 S.C. 613 June 10, 2002 15
______________________________________________________________________
...It's almost like [the jury] used the hand of one is the hand of all on Mr. Garrett, but
16. 564 S.E.2d 653 (S.C. 2002), 25474, Johnson v. Collins Entertainment Co., Inc.
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 564 S.E.2d 653, 349 S.C. 613 May 28, 2002 15
______________________________________________________________________
...lessor defendants would still be liable under the "hand of one is the hand of all" theory. "When
two or
17. 462 S.E.2d 862 (S.C.App. 1995), 2357, State v. Barroso
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 462 S.E.2d 862, 320 S.C. 1 June 12, 1995 14
______________________________________________________________________
...trial judge erred in charging the jury "the hand of one is the hand of all." They argue the "hand
18. 504 S.E.2d 307 (S.C. 1998), 24828, Douglas v. State
______________________________________________________________________
Supreme Court of South Carolina 504 S.E.2d 307, 332 S.C. 67 August 10, 1998 14
______________________________________________________________________
...that since the jury was charged with "the hand of one is the hand of all" theory, it should have
19. 647 S.E.2d 702 (S.C.App. 2007), 4255, State v. Thompson
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 647 S.E.2d 702, 374 S.C. 257 June 18, 2007 13
______________________________________________________________________
...S.E.2d 131, 132 (1991) . “Under the ‘hand of one is the hand of all’ theory [of accomplice liability
20. 676 S.E.2d 149 (S.C.App. 2009), 4516, State v. Halcomb
______________________________________________________________________
Court of Appeals of South Carolina 676 S.E.2d 149, 382 S.C. 432 March 11, 2009 13
______________________________________________________________________
...Subsequently, Halcomb and Cottrell were convicted under the " hand of one is the hand of all"
theory of accomplice liability
