Before Oral Arguments: How Alex Murdaugh’s Appeal Will Actually be Decided

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by JENN WOOD

***

As convicted killer Alex Murdaugh’s appeal of his two murder convictions moves toward oral arguments before the South Carolina Supreme Court, public attention has once again focused on a single, deceptively simple question: What happens next?

The answer is more limited — and more technical — than many expect.

While the oral arguments scheduled for February 11, 2026 will mark a major milestone in one of the most closely watched appeals in South Carolina history, the hearing itself will not decide whether Murdaugh walks free, returns to circuit court, or remains in prison for life.

Instead, it represents one step in a tightly constrained appellate process — one governed by rules that sharply limit what the state’s highest court can, and cannot, do.

Here’s how that process works…

***

WHAT THIS HEARING IS — AND ISN’T

Oral argument is not a retrial. No witnesses will testify. No new evidence will be introduced. And the justices will not reweigh guilt or innocence.

Instead, oral argument gives attorneys for both sides an opportunity to answer questions from the court about legal issues already preserved in the record — including jury tampering allegations, evidentiary rulings, and the constitutional standards that govern those claims.

Each side is typically allotted a limited amount of time, but the actual structure of the hearing is controlled by the justices, who may interrupt with questions at any point. In high-profile appeals, oral argument often functions less as a scripted presentation and more as a stress test: a chance for the court to probe weaknesses, clarify standards, and signal which issues matter most.

What oral argument will not do is produce an immediate ruling. Decisions are issued later, in writing.

***

RELATED | DICK HARPOOTLIAN ON ALEX MURDAUGH’S SUPREME COURT HEARING

***

POSSIBLE OUTCOMES…

After reviewing the written briefs, the full appellate record, and the arguments presented in open court, the South Carolina Supreme Court will retreat from public view to deliberate. What follows will not be an immediate ruling, but a careful legal analysis of the issues preserved for review — from alleged jury interference to contested evidentiary decisions. Once that process is complete, the court has several options.

1. AFFIRM THE CONVICTIONS

If the court affirms, Murdaugh’s murder convictions and life sentences remain intact. The justices would have concluded that any alleged errors were either legally unfounded or harmless under the applicable standards of review.

This is the narrowest outcome — but not necessarily the end of the road.

2. REVERSE AND ORDER A NEW TRIAL

If the court finds that constitutional violations or legal errors undermined the fairness of the trial, it could reverse the convictions and remand the case for a new trial in circuit court.

This would not mean Murdaugh is acquitted or released (certainly not seeing as he is also serving decades-long prison sentences for his financial crimes). It would instead reset the case to the pretrial stage, where prosecutors would decide whether to retry him.

3. REMAND FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

In some cases, the court may send the case back to a lower court for additional findings — particularly if it determines the wrong legal standard was applied or that the record is incomplete on a key issue.

A remand can delay final resolution while narrowing the scope of the issues that ultimately return to the high court.

***

RELATED | MURDAUGH APPEAL: PROSECUTORS SAY EVIDENCE ‘OVERWHELMING’

***

WHY A DECISION WON’T COME IMMEDIATELY

Supreme Court rulings are not delivered from the bench. Unlike trial courts, appellate courts do not announce decisions immediately after oral argument or signal outcomes in real time.

After oral argument concludes, the justices deliberate privately, reviewing the briefs, the full appellate record, and the arguments presented in court. One justice is assigned to draft the majority opinion, a process that involves legal research and revision. Other members of the court may choose to write concurring opinions to emphasize different reasoning, or dissenting opinions to explain their disagreement with the majority decision.

That internal process can take weeks or months, particularly in complex cases involving constitutional questions, disputed legal standards, or extensive trial records — all of which are present in the Murdaugh appeal. In high-profile criminal cases, where the stakes extend beyond the individual defendant to broader questions of judicial integrity and precedent, courts tend to proceed deliberately.

As a result, it is not unusual for Supreme Court decisions to arrive long after public attention has shifted elsewhere — quietly, in writing, and with lasting legal consequences.

***

WHAT HAPPENS IF MURDAUGH LOSES?

If the South Carolina Supreme Court ultimately affirms Alex Murdaugh’s murder convictions, the direct appeal process will come to an end. At that point, any remaining legal avenues would shift away from the Supreme Court and into separate post-conviction proceedings governed by a different set of rules and standards.

Here are the two primary avenues available to Murdaugh at that point…

POST-CONVICTION RELIEF (PCR)

Murdaugh could file a PCR application in state court, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel or newly discovered evidence. PCR proceedings are fact-intensive and often take years.

FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS

After exhausting state remedies, Murdaugh could seek federal habeas review — a narrow and highly deferential process focused on constitutional violations. While difficult to win, habeas relief is sometimes granted even when state appeals fail.

Neither avenue offers a quick resolution…

***

RELATED | ALEX MURDAUGH’S APPEAL: THE KEY ARGUMENTS

***

WHAT HAPPENS IF MURDAUGH WINS?

If the court orders a new trial, the case would return to circuit court — but not necessarily to Colleton County, and not necessarily under the same evidentiary framework that governed the first proceeding. Venue could be revisited, particularly given the extraordinary publicity surrounding the original trial, and a new judge would preside over both pretrial motions and trial proceedings.

Prosecutors would then face a series of strategic decisions: whether to retry the case in full, pursue alternative resolutions, narrow the scope of charges, or dismiss the case altogether. Any retrial would almost certainly be preceded by extensive pretrial litigation, including renewed battles over what evidence can be admitted, whether prior testimony is admissible, and how — if at all — the financial-crimes evidence can be presented to a new jury.

A second trial would also reopen unresolved questions that have already reverberated beyond this case — including the integrity of the jury process, the conduct of court officials, and the limits of using uncharged misconduct to establish motive.

In that sense, a new trial would not simply revisit the facts of the murders, but would again place South Carolina’s judicial system under the microscope.

***

THE BOTTOM LINE

The South Carolina Supreme Court’s role is not to determine whether Alex Murdaugh is likable, sympathetic, or infamous.

Its task is narrower — and harder: to decide whether the legal process that produced his convictions complied with constitutional and evidentiary rules.

Oral arguments will offer a glimpse into how the justices view that question. The answer itself will come later — quietly, in writing — and with consequences that could extend far beyond a single defendant.

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.

***

WANNA SOUND OFF?

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.