Criminal Appeal Without Constitutional Boundaries: A President Setting Case in South Carolina

When judges abuse their power, there is often little consequence. What has happened in this appeals case is unprecedented in the history of American law. The position taken by the South Carolina Court of Appeals stands in direct defiance of the United States Constitution. The judge who sentenced me to jail in a criminal case disguised as a civil matter, in order to strip me of my constitutional rights, remains a party to the case on appeal. In an ordinary civil case, this posture might be routine. This is not an ordinary case.

On May 30, 2025, the Court of Appeals determined that this matter is in fact criminal and added the State of South Carolina as a party in the standard criminal format. The problem is that the court did not remove Judge Singleton as a party. His attorney, Jim Logan, remains counsel of record alongside the Attorney General, led by Alan Wilson.

American law draws a clear and firm line between civil and criminal proceedings. The posture adopted by the court does not blur that line. It erases it entirely. When a judge issues a criminal ruling and that ruling is appealed, the sentencing judge becomes a neutral figure with no role in the appeal. Having the judge appear as a party alongside the state is a posture I have been unable to find anywhere in American legal history, despite extensive research. It is clear that this constitutional defiance is driven by an institutional reflex to protect the institution itself.

A brief history of what transpired is necessary. My wife was engaged in a heated probate dispute as an immigrant opposing a long-established family in Oconee County. While standing in the courthouse lobby, after filing papers on October 24, 2023, the court accused me of crimes I did not commit. On May 24, 2024, I went to the courthouse to pay a bill on my wife’s behalf and recorded myself doing so, as a means of protecting myself against further false aligations. Judge Singleton, the Oconee County Probate Judge, then sent an email to my wife and all the parties of the estate case stating that I would be held in contempt of court.

On May 29, I returned to the courthouse to receive a summons. I recorded for my own protection and was arrested at the order of Judge Singleton. I was immediately sentenced to ten days in jail. I was placed in handcuffs and incarcerated for what was labeled direct contempt of court. The fact that direct contempt can only occur during open court did not bother Singlton.

Later that same day, while I was in a holding cell, both a sentencing order and a summons arrived. Notably, the sentencing order contained no case number. The summons listed the civil probate case number from my wife’s estate dispute, a case to which I was not a party. I served the initial sentence and later appeared for a trial on June 17, 2024, held in probate court.

At the time of the hearing/trial, I had an approved public defender because both the public defender’s office and I agreed the matter was criminal due to the threat of incarceration. Once the trial began, the public defender, John Abdalla, engaged in a discussion with Judge Singleton in open court. Together, they decided the case was civil. My public defender then left the courtroom.

Judge Singleton denied my request for a continuance to obtain counsel. He then acted as the moving party, the lead investigator, the prosecuting attorney, and the judge, while forcing me to defend myself without representation. At the conclusion of the trial, I was sentenced to fifty days in jail for the events of May 24.

It is important to note that there was never a hearing regarding the events of May 29. I have never been accused of violating any law or court order on that date. There is a South Carolina Supreme Court administrative order restricting the use of electronic devices at the clerk’s window, but it is not a statute or criminal law. On May 24, I did record at the clerk’s window. However, I was never served with notice of that administrative order, I did not willfully violate the order, and therefore no violation occurred.

I appealed the case to the Tenth Circuit Court in Oconee County, where it was heard by Judge McIntosh. Judge Singleton appeared with his attorney under the same civil posture established by the probate court. Although Judge McIntosh acknowledged that the sentence imposed was criminal, he did not remove Judge Singleton or his attorney, nor did he refer the matter to the county prosecutor. Judge McIntosh upheld the probate court ruling before final briefs were filed, and after I raised clear constitutional objections in open court. I then appealed to the South Carolina Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals accepted the case in its civil posture, and Jim Logan continued filing motions as counsel for the sentencing judge. I later asked the court to recognize the case as criminal, as it should have been from the beginning. I believed that involvement by the Attorney General would compel recognition of the constitutional violations committed by Judges Singleton and McIntosh.

The Court of Appeals partially agreed, stating that criminal contempt is an offense against the state. However, the court stopped short of clearly declaring the case criminal. The order added the Attorney General but did not remove Jim Logan. From that point forward, every order and correspondence from the court has listed both Jim Logan and the Attorney General as counsel of record. This makes clear that both the sentencing judge and the state are treated as parties to the appeal.

This posture is entirely inappropriate and plainly unconstitutional. The Attorney General has even avoided serving Jim Logan on its motions, reflecting the internal contradiction of the court’s position. I have since filed a motion seeking clarification of the roles of Judge Singleton and Jim Logan, along with a motion requesting that the Attorney General properly serve Logan. For anyone familiar with American law, this level of institutional neglect should be alarming.

Since the appeal began, counsel for Judge Singleton and the Attorney General have done everything possible to avoid the merits of the case. Addressing the substance would expose serious structural failures within the judicial system. The Attorney General is now attempting to dismiss the case on the ground that it was not served notice of the appeal within the filing deadline.

That claim ignores reality. At the time of filing, the court itself treated the case as civil, so Jim Logan was served. The state was added later by court order, which necessarily required a finding of jurisdiction. The state has fully participated in the appeal, filing motions and briefs, and has never claimed any prejudice from service timing. The Attorney General already raised this argument once, and the court deferred it, asking that it be included in the final brief rather than ruling on it.

The final brief filed by the state does not address a single one of the twenty three issues raised in my appeal. It relies solely on the service argument. How does a case reach this point without corrective action by either the courts or the state? Meanwhile, Judge McIntosh continues to rule on cases involving my wife with extreme bias, threatening our American investments. I remain under a gag order that makes publication of this article itself an act of contempt. I am still prohibited from leaving South Carolina more than a year after being released from jail, pending the outcome of this appeal.

To make matters more troubling, I have taken steps to ensure that the Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, John Kittredge, is aware of this case. He ran his campaign as a strict constitutionalist. Yet under his leadership, the court system has shown no capacity for self correction when an individual’s rights were so aggressively violated.