Appellate Defender David Alexander, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Julie A. Coleman, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

The Court reviews the court of appeals' decision in Goss v. State, Op. No. 2016-UP-382 (S.C. Ct. App. filed July 27, 2016), affirming the circuit court's denial of post-conviction relief. The Court is asked whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and present an alibi defense.

Chief Appellate Defender Robert Michael Dudek, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior Assistant Attorney General David A. Spencer, both of Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston, all for Respondent.

The Court issued a writ of certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision in State v. Brown, 2016 UP-447 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Nov. 2, 2016).

Edward K. Pritchard, III, of Pritchard Law Group, LLC, of Charleston, for Plaintiff. Robert E. Kneece, III and John S. Wilkerson, III, both of Turner Padget Graham & Laney, P.A., of Charleston; and R. Hawthorne Barrett, of Turner Padget Graham & Laney, P.A., of Columbia, for Defendant.

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina asks this Court to determine whether (1) can a law enforcement officer who conducts an official investigation of an accident that was not contemporaneously observed by an identified, surviving person, be a "witness" under section 38-77-170 of the South Carolina Code, and (2) do injuries caused by a drive-by shooting "arise out of" the use of a motor vehicle under section 38-77-140 of the South Carolina Code, where the shooting victim was operating a motor vehicle followed by the assailant vehicle and blocked from escape by the assailant vehicle during the shooting?

Appellate Defender Susan B. Hackett, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., Assistant Attorney General J. Scott Matthews, all of Columbia and Solicitor Scarlett Wilson, of Charleston, for Respondent.

The Court determines whether the circuit court's denial of Petitioner's motion to represent himself was a violation of Petitioner's right to represent himself.

Thomas R. Goldstein, of Belk Cobb Infinger & Goldstein, PA, of Charleston, for Petitioner. Timothy Alan Domin, of Clawson & Staubes, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent.

The Court reviews the court of appeals' decision in Olds v. City of Goose Creek, 418 S.C. 573, 795 S.E.2d 163 (Ct. App. 2016). The issue before the Court is whether the court of appeals erred in its interpretation of the term "gross income" as defined and used in the City of Goose Creek's business license ordinance, §§ 110.001-.022.

Howard A. Van Dine, III, Allen Mattison Bogan, and Erik Tison Norton, all of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Blake A. Hewitt, of Bluestein Thompson Sullivan, LLC, of Columbia; and Daniel W. Luginbill, of Wilson & Luginbill, LLC, of Bamberg, both for Respondents.

The Court issued a writ of certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision in Buchanan v. South Carolina Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association, 417 S.C. 562, 790 S.E.2d 783 (Ct. App. 2016).

Stephen Peterson Groves, Sr., and Alexandra Harrington Austin, both of Nexsen Pruet, LLC, of Charleston; and John Joseph Dodds, III, of The Law Firm of Cisa & Dodds, LLP, of Mt. Pleasant, for Petitioner. Justin O'Toole Lucey and Stephanie D. Drawdy, both of Justin O'Toole Lucey, PA, of Mt. Pleasant, for Respondent.

In this appeal, Petitioner Donald Lancaster contends the court of appeals erroneously expanded this Court's holding in Linda Mc Company v. Shore, 390 S.C. 543, 703 S.E.2d 499 (2010), thereby granting relief to Respondent Frank Gordon, who sought to enforce a judgment over ten years old.

John Jay James, II, of Paulling and James, LLP, of Darlington and J. Rene Josey, of Turner, Padgett, Graham & Laney, PA, of Florence, for Petitioner. Ariail E. King, of Lewis Babcock, LLP and James M. Griffin, of Griffin Davis Law Firm, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

The Court reviews the court of appeals' decision in Pee Dee Health Care, P.A. v. Estate of Thompson, 418 S.C. 557, 795 S.E.2d 40 (Ct. App. 2016). The issue relates to the time period in which to file a motion under Rule 11 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.