The defense team representing disgraced attorney and convicted killer Alex Murdaugh has filed new documents asking South Carolina's highest court to take a look at his appeal.
Murdaugh is currently serving two life sentences plus decades for the murders of his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul, as well as financial crimes. While Murdaugh has admitted stealing from clients and being addicted to opioids, he has maintained his innocence in the murders.
Shortly after Murdaugh was sentenced, his attorneys called the guilty verdict into question and accused then-Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill of tampering with the jury by making comments implying Murdaugh's guilt. The allegations prompted a January hearing, where retired Chief Justice Jean Toal denied the bid.
"The circuit court nevertheless denied the motion for a new trial," Murdaugh's attorneys said in the motion, "reasoning that there is no presumption of justice from tampering with jurors during a trial matter pending before the jury and Mr. Murdaugh failed to prove that Ms. Hill's comments actually changed the jury's verdict."
This week, Murdaugh's attorneys filed a new motion with the South Carolina Supreme Court, asking them to bypass the court of appeals and take up the issue themselves. The central issue, Murdaugh's attorneys argue, is whether Justice Toal relied on incorrect case law in deciding Murdaugh would not get a new trial.
Justice Toal relied on South Carolina law and had determined during a pre-hearing hearing that Murdaugh would bear the burden of proving actual prejudice from the jury. But the U.S. Supreme Court has previously held in unanimous rulings "that in a criminal case, any 'tampering … with a juror during a trial about the matter pending before the jury is, for obvious reasons, deemed presumptively prejudicial" and "the burden rests heavily upon the Government to establish … that such contact with the juror was harmless."
Murdaugh's attorneys are thus asking the Supreme Court to step in and determine "whether most federal circuit courts have misunderstood Supreme Court precedent."
RELATED STORY | Alex Murdaugh gets 40 years for stealing from clients and his law firm
In their argument asking the state Supreme Court to pick up the case, Murdaugh's attorneys emphasize that their client's case is one of great public interest, and include in their motion a comment from state Rep. Tommy Pope about Court TV's coverage: "Pope said the gavel-to-gavel coverage probably helped viewers reach their own conclusions and understand the legal system's 'positives' as well as its 'warts.'"
Hill resigned from her position as clerk of courts in March 2024 and is facing multiple ethics violations on charges she used her position to promote her book, give unauthorized people access to secure areas and misappropriated money. An ethics commission hearing is scheduled in December. Hill faces no criminal charges.
Also in a separate filing this week, Murdaugh's attorneys are asking a federal appeals court to review the 40-year sentence he was given for financial crimes. Their motion argues that the sentence was "grossly disproportionate to the crimes committed" making it unconstitutional and "cruel and unusual punishment."
"Instead the sentence imposed is more appropriate for a murder conviction, which serves as a backstop to Murdaugh's state murder convictions should they be overturned on appeal, as requested by the government."
This story was originally published by Lauren Silver at Court TV.
