Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

349 S.C. 414

563 S.E.2d 339

State v. Brown

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided March 14, 2002

Court of Appeals of South Carolina · decided 2002-03-14

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 2013

8 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2002-03-14

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

STILWELL, Judge

¶1(dissenting):

¶2I respectfully dissent, solely because I believe the specific wording of the additional condition of his probation that Brown “must obtain treatment” is controlling.

¶3The discussion centering on whether Brown must “complete treatment” or “admit guilt” in order to get treatment I submit totally misses the point. In my opinion, it was incumbent on Brown to do whatever was necessary to comply fully with the condition of his probation. If he was rejected at one facility, the burden was on Brown to go back to his probation officer and explain that he could not obtain treatment at that location and seek another source to “obtain treatment.”

¶4It is not appropriate to allow Brown to sit idly by in the hopes that his non-compliance would be tolerated and then ultimately excused.

¶5I would affirm.

/349/sc/414 · .json · Public domain