Elizabeth Franklin-Best

Appellate lawyer

Elizabeth Franklin-Best, a criminal appellate lawyer seeking freedom for her clients.  Focused exclusively on criminal appeals in both state and federal courts.

Blog

State v. Zuber (A-54-15, A-63-15) (filed 1/11/17) New Jersey Supreme Court finds “functional equivalent” of Life sentence violates Graham and Miller.

January 13th, 2017
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

Another state gets on board with this unanimous opinion (following in the footsteps of California, Ohio, Florida, Louisiana, Iowa, Wyoming, Connecticut, and Illinois) and holds that an inmate's sentence of 110 years with 55 years of parole ineligibility, imposed on him for crimes committed when he was 17, violates Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) and Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. __, 132 S. Ct. 2455(2012). The New Jersey Sup

United States v. Brandon Tate (4th Cir. 2017, filed 1/11/17): District court’s job to determine “applicable Guideline range” not the Gov’t’s.

January 12th, 2017
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

So, Mr. Tate raises a breach of plea agreement issue.  He agreed to plead guilty to some drug charges and the Government agreed in the plea agreement to "seek a sentence at the lowest end of and either party may seek a departure or variance from the 'applicable guideline range.'  Tate also agreed to waive his "rights to contest the conviction except for: 1) claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or 2) prosecutorial misconduct." Tate disag

State v. Cain, Appellate Case No. 2015-001983– Excellent SCSCt Win in “Theoretical Weight” Drug Trafficking Case (filed January 5, 2017)

January 9th, 2017
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

This is an excellent result for Mr. Cain, but practitioners need to beware because the Court offers guidance on how these cases can be prosecuted in the future without running into the problem here that necessitated the reversal. The facts are straightforward-- law enforcement searched a house where Cain was present. They did not find any methamphetamine, but they did find a number of precursors, including packages of Sudafed.  The State relied

Ramirez v. State, Appellate Case No. 2015-002063 (filed 1/5/17), SC Supreme Court Clarifies Law for Incompetent Guilty Plea

January 6th, 2017
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

The petitioner here is severely intellectually disabled.  His plea counsel failed to request an independent competency evaluation prior to his guilty plea.  Initially, the PCR judge denied relief.  The South Carolina Court of Appeals disagreed and found that trial counsel was ineffective but denied relief finding itself constrained under the "any evidence" standard that typically applies when the appellate courts review a PCR judge's findings

Happy New Year from the Ohio Supreme Court! Mandatory Waiver Provisions for Kids to Adult Court Violates the Constitution (State v. Aalim, Slip Op. No. 2016-Ohio-8278). Time to fix this injustice in SC, too!

January 3rd, 2017
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

Time to make this happen in South Carolina, too!  One feature of the insidious School to Prison Pipeline is that, pursuant to statutes like the one we have in South Carolina, see below, kids who are charged with certain felonies are automatically waived up to Big People Court.  That is, they’re treated like adults, even though they’re still obviously children.  The Ohio Supreme Court, in an opinion issued December 22, 2016, has found those

Cruz v. Marshall, App. No. 15-6130 (filed 12/19/16), Unpublished 4th Circuit HABEAS REMAND

December 29th, 2016
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

Excellent work by the Appellate Litigation Project, Georgetown University Law Center!  Cruz, a habeas petitioner, filed a petition alleging 5 grounds of relief.  The State moved to dismiss the petition as untimely.  The magistrate court recommended granting the State’s motion.  Cruz then filed objections to the Report and Recommendation (R&R), and the district court summarily rejected those objections, adopted the recommendation, and di

State v. Moore, Slip OP. No. 2016-Ohio-8288—Ohio Supreme Court reverses 112-year sentence for juvenile because “functional equivalent” of life without parole sentence.

December 26th, 2016
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

It’s important to keep an eye on how other states are handling this very important issue.  In South Carolina, in Tyrone Aiken v. Byars, 410 S.C. 534, 765 S.E.2d 572 (2014) our Supreme Court recognized what the United States Supreme Court held in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012)—that Life without Parole sentences for juveniles (even in homicide cases) are unconstitutional without an individualized sentencing proceed

State v. Walter Bash, HUGE WIN in the SCSCt on a Fourth Amendment Claim, and Reaffirming the Sanctity of the Curtilage.

December 21st, 2016
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

UPDATE:  On March 15, 2017, the South Carolina Supreme Court substituted this opinion to clarify that circuit court did not rely on the officers' subjective intent to determine whether the officers conducted a search, and that the officers' objective purpose is the proper inquiry.  YAY!   THE GREAT WIN STAYS IN PLACE! Excellent win by Susan Hackett of the Office of Indigent Defense!  Here, the police received an anonymous

Parole, a Meaningful Chance at Freedom

December 15th, 2016
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

As a criminal defense lawyer, I’ve had the privilege of representing a few inmates for their parole hearings. I put together affidavits, letters from supporters, speak to family members about living arrangements and potential employers about money making opportunities.  I review the case and analyze a client’s institutional history.  Then, I put these elements together to present to the parole board to make the case why my client should be

Post-Conviction Relief Hearings, How to Raise and Preserve Your Winning Issues Under the Current System

December 4th, 2016
Elizabeth Franklin-Best

In my opinion, the post-conviction relief (PCR) system in South Carolina is completely and utterly broken for the vast majority of inmates. Under the Commission of Indigent Defense’s relatively new system, attorneys contract with that agency to take these cases. For their efforts, they receive a flat sum of $800. That’s it. And they’re not allowed to bill for mileage or other ordinary expenses. They can request funding for an investigator,