Gibbs v. State, 403 S.C. 481

Gibbs convicted by jury of kidnapping, armed robbery, and weapon offense; direct appeal denied; filed two PCR applications alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
PCR alleges (1) trial counsel failed to contemporaneously object to photographic lineup, show-up, and in-court identifications; (2) trial counsel failed to request a jury alibi instruction.
PCR court found counsel deficient on both issues but held no prejudice because identification evidence was admitted after a Neil v. Biggers hearing and alibi charge was not prejudicial given the overall jury charge.
Trial proceedings included two lineups, a show-up, and in-court identifications; some witnesses identified Gibbs while one did not; a thorough pretrial Biggers hearing occurred.
Gibbs presented an alibi defense at trial; his mother and girlfriend testified to being with him watching TV; the State rebutted with station availability evidence.
On appeal, the PCR court’s determinations were affirmed; the Supreme Court applied an any-evidence standard and found no prejudice, affirming the denial of relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel’s failure to contemporaneously object to identification evidence was prejudicial.	Gibbs contends lack of contemporaneous objection barred appellate review and prejudiced trial.	State argues identifications were reliable despite some suggestiveness and Biggers hearing supported admissibility.	No prejudice; identification evidence reliable; objections would not have changed outcome.
Whether trial counsel’s failure to request an alibi instruction prejudiced Gibbs.	Gibbs contends alibi instruction was necessary given trial evidence.	State argues the overall jury charge on identity and burden sufficed to negate prejudice.	No prejudice under the whole-charge analysis; alibi instruction not required to change result.

Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (U.S. 1972) (standard for reliability of out-of-court identifications after suggestive procedures)
State v. Moore, 343 S.C. 282 (S.C. 2000) (two-prong analysis: unduly suggestive and reliability under Biggers)
Ramsey v. State, 345 S.C. 607 (S.C. 2001) (in camera identification review framework)
Curtis v. Commonwealth, 396 S.E.2d 386 (Va. App. 1990) (addressing suggestiveness and reliability in identifications)
Roseboro v. State, 317 S.C. 292 (S.C. 1994) (alibi instruction emphasized when credibility and burden issues arise; prejudice analysis)