Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number 19445 Attorney(S) George T. Thomason, Esq., of Spartanburg, for Appellant, cites: As to error for the Trial Judge's to admit the testimony of the police officer describing the Appellant's conduct at the time of arrest and to deny a motion for a new trial on the grounds that such testimony was irrelevant and served only to prejudice the jury against the Defendant: 361 Ill. 64, 73-74, 196 N.E. 821, 825; 371 U.S. 471, 483 n. 10 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed. 441; 116 U.S. App. D.C. 45, 320 F.2d 767. Emmet H. Clair, Asst. Atty. Gen., of Columbia, and Claude A. Taylor, Jr., Sol., of Spartanburg, for Respondent, cite: As to the Trial Judge's properly admitting the testimony of the witness and denying a motion for a new trial: 253 S.C. 168, 169 S.E.2d 706; 255 S.C. 309, 178 S.E.2d 652. See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. The STATE, Respondent, v. Malcolm McKINNEY, Appellant. June 30, 1972. Per Curiam: Malcolm McKinney, the appellant herein, was convicted in the Spartanburg County Court of an assault of a high and aggravated nature. During the course of the trial certain testimony was admitted over the objection of his counsel. Thereafter, counsel for the appellant cross-examined the witness thereabout without reserving the objection previously made. The objection was thereby lost and if any error had been committed in the admission of the testimony it was cured. State v. Smith, 245 S.C. 59, 138 S.E.2d 705; State v. Motley, 251 S.C. 568, 164 S.E.2d 569, and State v. Lee, 255 S.C. 309, 178 S.E.2d 652. The only error alleged was the admission of the testimony hereinbefore referred to. It is apparent under the cases above cited that the exception posing this question is without merit. The judgment below is, Affirmed.