| Printed Page 6640, May 16 | Printed Page 6660, May 17 |

Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The House assembled at 12:00 Noon.

Deliberations were opened with prayer by the Chaplain of the House of Representatives, the Rev. Dr. Alton C. Clark as follows:

Eternal Father, we bow before You to acknowledge our need of Your help. We are insufficient of ourselves, burdened by many anxieties, tempted by cynicism, and often disheartened by our frailties. Stretch out before us wide horizons and illumine our paths with Your truths, enabling us to be patient in debate, charitable in judgment, and wise in decisions. We pray for inner strength to carry heavy burdens, for uncompromising courage to follow Your beckoning, for eyes to see Your way, and wills to follow that way fearlessly.

To You, Lord, we render our praise and thanksgiving. Amen.

Pursuant to Rule 6.3, the House of Representatives was led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America by the SPEAKER.

After corrections to the Journal of the proceedings of yesterday, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.

Rep. HODGES moved that when the House adjourns, it adjourn in memory of Justin Wilson of Lexington County, which was agreed to.

TO: The Clerk of the Senate
The Clerk of the House
FROM: James H. Hodges, Chairman

Judicial Screening Committee
DATE: May 17, 1994

In compliance with the provisions of Act No. 119, 1975 S.C. Acts 122, it is respectfully requested that the following information be printed in the Journals of the Senate and the House.

The Screening Process

Pursuant to Act No. 119 of 1975 and Act. No. 181 of 1993, this Committee has considered the qualifications of candidates seeking election to the positions of Associate Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court; Judge of the Family Court of the Eighth Judicial Circuit, Seat Number 1; Judge of the Family Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Seat Number 3; Judge of the Family Court of the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit, Seat Number 1; and Administrative Law Judge, Seat Numbers 4, 5 and 6.

The Judicial Screening Committee is charged by law to consider the qualifications of candidates for the Judiciary and Judge of the Administrative Law Judge Division. When notice is received that an individual intends to seek election or reelection to one of these positions, the Committee conducts a thorough investigation of the candidate. The Committee's investigation includes a review of the candidate's scholastic, employment, and financial history and, in particular, focuses on the candidate's adherence to a strong code of ethical behavior, be it to the Rules of Professional Conduct governing the attorneys practicing in South Carolina, the Code of Judicial Conduct regulating the activities of all judges in South Carolina, or the more generally accepted, but unwritten, rules of fairness and respect which should govern interaction between all of this state's citizens.

While Act 119 restricts this Committee to making findings of qualification or non-qualification, the Committee views its role to also include the obligation to consider candidates in the context of the position to which, if they are elected, they will serve and, to some degree, govern. To that end, this Committee has inquired as to the quality of justice delivered in the hearing and court rooms of South Carolina and has sought to impart, through its questioning, the view of the public it represents as to matters of judicial temperament, concern for an informed Bench and Administrative Law Judge, and the absoluteness of the Judicial Canons as to recusal for conflict of interest, prohibition on ex parte communication,

The Committee's report includes the Transcript of the Proceedings before the Screening Committee on April 26 and April 27, 1994. The Transcript does not include all exhibits offered by candidates or witnesses at the hearing because of the length of some exhibits. Exhibits which are not reproduced as a part of the Transcript may be viewed in the Office of the Judicial Screening Committee (Room 211 of the Gressette Building), since these exhibits were reviewed and considered by the Committee in making its findings.

Many of the candidates in this round of screening had been recently screened by the Committee for seats on the same court. The previous screening occurred within three and one-half months of this screening in the case of candidates for Administrative Law Judge and within one month of this screening in the case of candidates for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

At its most recent hearings on April 26 and April 27, 1994, the Committee determined that no changes had occurred in the status of any of these same candidates. Therefore, the Committee incorporated the candidates' previous testimony, as applicable, into the transcript reported here. Without any changes in status, the Committee also adopted its previous findings regarding these candidates and reports those same findings, with appropriate modifications, in this document.

The changes in the previous testimony and findings principally relate to time specific information and complaining witnesses. If a complaining witness testified at the most recent April 26 and April 27, 1994 hearings, the transcript and findings reflect that. If a complaining witness testified at a previous screening but not at this screening, previous testimony and findings relative to the complaint are not repeated in this report. The Committee notes that any complaints in previous screenings regarding these candidates were found to be without merit.

The Committee has incorporated testimony and findings from earlier reports only because of the closeness in time of the previous screenings and only because the candidates were screened for seats on the same court.

The inquiry which we undertake is a thorough one. It involves a complete personal and professional background check on every candidate. The candidate is investigated by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division including court records. A Statement of Economic Interest is required. We receive a credit report. We receive reports from the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline with respect to attorneys and judges who are offering and from the Board of Commissioners on Judicial Standards with respect to sitting judges. The candidate's Personal Data Questionnaire details the personal history and professional experience and contains five letters of reference.

We are here today for the purpose of screening for the following vacancies. One is an Associate Justice position with the South Carolina Supreme Court; the second, Family Court Seats in the Eighth Circuit, Seat 1; Eleventh Circuit, Seat 3, and the Sixteenth Circuit, seat 1, and, finally Administrative Law Judge Division, Seats 4, 5 and 6.

Prior to moving into the first screening of the Supreme Court candidates, let me introduce Representative M.O. Alexander who is seated over to my left. I'm Jim Hodges. I'm the chairman of the screening committee. From time to time other screening members will be arriving today, but we'll move right into the Supreme Court seats at this time.

Our first candidate is Judge Ralph King Anderson, Jr. Judge Anderson, if you'd come forward, please. Raise your right hand.
RALPH KING ANDERSON, JR., having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE CHAIRMAN: Judge Anderson, your last screening was March 19th, 1994?
JUDGE ANDERSON: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Let me just say at this time that what we propose to do because we have no complaining witnesses against you is to ask if you have any objection to our incorporating your last testimony, the inquiries and your responses, into the record.

We did have a complaining witness at that time who did not complain during this race. What we would propose to do would be to delete those

1. Ralph King Anderson, Jr.
Home Address: Business Address:
2997 Pamplico Highway P. O. Box 1562
Florence, SC 29505 Florence, SC 29503

2. He was born in Florence County, South Carolina on November 13, 1936. He is presently 57 years old.

4. He was married to Loretta Lynch on August 31, 1957. He has two children: Ralph King, III (Assistant Attorney General - South Carolina), and Debra Arlene Anderson Vause (part-time music teacher and church pianist).

5. Military Service: None

6. He attended Clemson College; September, 1954 - August, 1956; received 90 credits; transferred directly from Clemson College to the University of South Carolina Law School, under an arrangement existing at that time. He attended the University of South Carolina Law School; September, 1956 - June, 1959; received LLB Degree (this degree changed to Juris Doctor on September 3, 1970).

9. Taught or Lectured:
10/30/86; Bench Bar Conference on Criminal Trial Advocacy; Batson v. Kentucky; 86-38
10/20/88; Eminent Domain (JCLE); Judicial Perspective (Panel Discussion); 88- 40
11/4/88; Bench/Bar Conference on Criminal Law; Jury Instructions; 88-43
1/20/89; 4th Annual Criminal Law Update 1988 in Review (JCLE); A View From the Bench; 89-03
9/7/90; Legal Ethics & Lawyer Malpractice; Common Pleas Perspective; 90- 32
10/19/90; Criminal Practice in South Carolina; Jury Instructions; 90-38
10/26/90; Civil Trial Advocacy Bench/Bar Conference; 90-39
6/8/91; 1991 Annual Meeting (Young Lawyer's Division); Judicial Ethics
9/27/91; Criminal Practice in South Carolina; Jury Instructions; 91-35
1/17/92; 7th Annual Criminal Law Update; Observations from the Trial Bench; 92-02
6/19/92; 1992 Annual Meeting (Young Lawyer's Division); Update on Ethics and Trial Practice
9/18/92; Criminal Practice in South Carolina; Jury Instructions; 92-36
10/23/92; Auto Insurance Update '92; Trial of an Auto Case; 92-42
12/11/92; Attorney's Fees; Circuit Court Practice; 92-50
1/28/93; 1993 Mid-Year Meeting (Trial & Appellate Advocacy); Circumstantial Evidence
Bridge the Gap (1984-present); Nuts & Bolts of Circuit Court Practice; Two Presentations Every Year
10/8/93; South Carolina Circuit Court Bench/Bar 1993 Update; Riding the Wave of Demonstrative Evidence: Admissibility of Computer-Generated Animations on Videotape
12/17/93; Is Your Law Office Safe? Frivolous Proceedings Act and Rule 11

10. Published Books and Articles:
A publication entitled "Nuts and Bolts" has been authored by him. In addition, he has written numerous materials for use at Judicial/Legal Seminars.

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
(a) practiced law in Columbia with Mr. R. K. Wise from July 17, 1959 until December 1, 1959
(b) opened practice in Florence, South Carolina in December, 1959 running through 1960
(c) early part of 1960 to December of 1960 - practiced law in Marion, South Carolina under a share arrangement with Waddell Byrd
(d) In December, 1961, became employed with the firm of Yarborough, Parrott and Anderson and remained until September of 1979
(e) sworn in as Circuit Judge in September of 1979, serving continuously until present date

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:He has been on the bench for 14 1/2 years. He does not know his last rating in this publication.

20. Judicial Office:
Elected as Circuit Court Judge, beginning service on September 14, 1979, serving continuously until present. The Circuit Court jurisdiction is unlimited except by statutory and constitutional parameters.

21. Five (5) Significant Orders or Opinions:
(a) State v. Jonathan Dale Simmons, ___ S.C. ___, 427 S.E.2d 175 (1993). This is a death penalty case. Numerous issues were involved in this trial relating to the death penalty law and criminal law in general. The Defendant received the death penalty. The South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed

22. Public Office:
Elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives from Florence County in November, 1972, serving continuously to August, 1979.

24. Unsuccessful Candidate:
He was defeated as a candidate for the South Carolina House of Representatives in 1970 by less than 200 votes. He was defeated as a candidate for the South Carolina House of Representatives in 1962 by an overwhelming vote.

32. Sued:
(1) 6:CV-85-2730, Robert L. Wilson v. City of Greenville, Mayor William Workman, Ralph King Anderson, Jr. . . .:This was a civil rights action that related to a local sign ordinance; the Summons and Complaint were filed on October 10, 1985; then United States District Court Judge Wilkins dismissed the action on October 24, 1985; the records maintained at the District Court indicate that the defendants were never served.
(2) 3:CV-86-1444, Jasper Buchanan v. Richard Riley, Travis Medlock, William Leeke, Woodrow Lewis, Donald Zelenka, Ralph King Anderson, Jr. . . . : Pro Se action brought by an inmate of the State Corrections Department; United States Magistrate Gambrell recommended dismissal, concluding that the action was frivolous, on June 3, 1986; United States District Court Judge Blatt entered judgment for all defendants on July 16, 1986; according to the docket sheet at the District Court, the defendants were never served.
(3) 3:CV-80-1640, Annie M. Timmons v. [all members of the South Carolina House of Representatives and the South Carolina Senate]:United States Magistrate Gambrell advised the plaintiff that a voluntary dismissal would be directed because the defendants were never served or, in the alternative, that the plaintiff would have to serve the defendants properly; this letter was dated July 27, 1982; then United States District Court Judge Wilkins issued an Order

| Printed Page 6640, May 16 | Printed Page 6660, May 17 |