741 S.E.2d 727
S.C.2013Background
- Appellant Harrison was convicted of leaving the scene with death and driving under suspension in South Carolina.
- He struck a motorcyclist on Highway 25, did not stop, and was later located hiding in a vacant house.
- The trial court sentenced him to twenty years for leaving the scene with death and six months for driving under suspension (concurrent).
- Appellant argued the penalty provision of section 56-5-1210 is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.
- The court's analysis adopted Harmelin and Solem-based proportionality review, concluding the statute is constitutional.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the penalty provision of 56-5-1210 unconstitutionally punishes leaving the scene with death. | Harrison argues the penalty is grossly disproportionate to the offense. | State argues legislature may rationally determine penalties and discretion lies with sentencing. | Penalty not grossly disproportionate; statute constitutional. |
Key Cases Cited
- Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349 (U.S. 1910) (origin of proportionality principle)
- Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (U.S. 1962) (individualized crime impact on punishment need not be literal extreme)
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (U.S. 1983) (three-factor proportionality framework (rare reliance in noncapital cases))
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (U.S. 1991) (no general proportionality review for noncapital sentences; legislative discretion favored)
- Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (U.S. 1983) (interjurisdictional comparative analysis limits in capital contexts)
- Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453 (U.S. 1991) (legislature may define penalties without sentencing discretion)
- Westvaco Corp. v. S.C. Dept. of Revenue, 321 S.C. 59 (S.C. 1995) (preserves limited review for constitutional challenges)