The former attorney, serving two life sentences for the murders of his wife and son, argues jury tampering and improper evidence influenced his conviction.
COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Supreme Court will hear an appeal from Alex Murdaugh, the ex-lawyer convicted of double murder whose trial made national and international headlines and spawned documentaries and TV movies.
The docket for the Supreme Court shows Murdaugh has a hearing set for February 11, 2026, in front of the justices for oral arguments related to his murder convictions.
A jury handed back guilty verdicts in March 2023 against murder on charges that he killed his wife, Maggie, and their adult son, Paul, at the family’s estate in Colleton County in June of 2021. Circuit Court Judge Clifton Newman then gave Murdaugh two life sentences in prison, which he’s currently serving at a state prison.
Murdaugh, however, has always maintained his innocence.
In their appeal, Murdaugh’s lawyers gave several key reasons they believe the conviction should be tossed, chief among them that they allege there was jury tampering by the former clerk of court for Colleton County, Becky Hill. Hill was clerk during the trial and was around the jury. His lawyers argued that in the weeks after the trial, they were told Hill made comments to jurors to not be misled by Murdaugh’s testimony and to “watch his body language.” They’ve argued those comments, on their face, were tampering.
The state, however, said those comments did not sway the jury and the evidence presented in the case is what led to the conviction. In January of 2024, former South Carolina Chief Justice Jean Toal heard a motion by Murdaugh’s attorneys on those claims as they argued he deserved a new trial. Toal ultimately denied the request for a new trial, saying that Hill’s comments had to have led to a juror actually changing their verdict to be considered jury tampering.
Murdaugh’s attorneys also will argue that Judge Newman improperly allowed the state to make the case that Murdaugh’s ongoing financial crimes were a motive in the killings. They call that “illogical, implausible, and unsupported by the evidence,” in their filing with the court. Witnesses were allowed to testify about Murdaugh’s embezzlement of funds from his law firm, which he hadn’t gone to trial for at the time. He was subsequently convicted after his murder convictions for those violations.
The state, however, said he was desperate at the time and was trying to distract investigators from discovering the millions he had taken.
Murdaugh’s trial lasted for six weeks and was broadcast gavel to gavel by multiple media outlets and drew national attention. Interest in the case led to the creation of documentaries, books, and two TV movies, including one that recently aired on Hulu.