State v. Dickey, 716 S.E.2d 97

Petitioner Jason Dickey was a security guard at Cornell Arms with a valid concealed weapons permit and carried a loaded pistol.
On April 29, 2004, Boot and Stroud, who were intoxicated, were at Cornell Arms with McGarrigle and West after a day of drinking; Boot created a disturbance prompting eviction requests.
Dickey, at the request of a tenant, attempted to eject Boot and Stroud; outside the building, Boot and Stroud advanced toward Dickey while Boot shouted and showed aggression.
Dickey pulled a gun from his pocket about fifteen feet from Boot and Stroud when they began advancing toward him; Boot continued toward him, and Dickey fired three shots, killing Boot.
Dickey claimed self-defense; the State indicted him for murder; after trial, he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, which the Court of Appeals affirmed, and then the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review self-defense.
The Supreme Court reversed, holding Dickey was entitled to a directed verdict on self-defense, and did not reach other issues.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Dickey was entitled to a directed verdict on self-defense	State: self-defense failed to negate elements beyond reasonable doubt	Dickey: acted in self-defense; no fault in ejecting trespassers; imminent danger	Yes; directed verdict for Dickey on self-defense affirmed
Whether the Stand Your Ground law applied retroactively to Dickey	State: Act applies prospectively; no retroactive immunity	Dickey: Act should apply retroactively to pending cases	Applied prospectively; Act not retroactively applied
Whether self-defense jury instructions were adequate	State: instructions correctly stated elements and right to act on appearances	Dickey: curtilage/duty to retreat and other nuances were inadequately charged	Instructions sufficiently covered self-defense elements; no reversible error
Whether the voluntary manslaughter instruction was properly submitted	State: fear can support heat of passion under voluntary manslaughter	Dickey: fear not sufficiently shown to warrant heat of passion; improper subtraction from murder	Court of Appeals' submission affirmed; district disagreed in plurality; but Court reversed on self-defense, rendering this issue moot for the final disposition

State v. Davis, 282 S.C. 45, 317 S.E.2d 452 (1984) (defines four elements of self-defense)
State v. Hendrix, 270 S.C. 653, 244 S.E.2d 503 (1978) (castle doctrine and retreat considerations)
State v. Starnes, 388 S.C. 590, 698 S.E.2d 604 (2010) (limits on heat-of-passion instruction after fear evidence)
State v. Fuller, 297 S.C. 440, 377 S.E.2d 328 (1989) (appearance of imminent danger and self-defense standard)
State v. Wiggins, 330 S.C. 538, 500 S.E.2d 489 (1998) (curtilage and duty to retreat concepts)
State v. Jackson, 297 S.C. 523, 377 S.E.2d 570 (1989) (test for acting on appearances in self-defense)
State v. Brooks, 252 S.C. 504, 167 S.E.2d 307 (1969) (right to eject from premises and related retreat implications)
State v. Taylor, 356 S.C. 227, 589 S.E.2d 1 (2003) (mutual combat doctrine considerations)
State v. Burkhart, 350 S.C. 252, 565 S.E.2d 298 (2002) (directed verdict standard for self-defense challenges)