Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

The State, Respondent, v. Mel

PER CURIAM

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

Appeal From Richland County
DeAndrea G. Benjamin, Circuit Court Judge


AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Assistant Attorney General Mary Shannon Williams, and Solicitor Daniel Edward Johnson, all of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Wharton, 381 S.C. 209, 213, 672 S.E.2d 786, 788 (2009) ("A trial court's decision regarding jury charges will not be reversed where the charges, as a whole, properly charged the law to be applied."); State v. Rayfield, 369 S.C. 106, 117-18, 631 S.E.2d 244, 250 (2006) ("A trial [court] is not required to charge [section 16-3-657 of the South Carolina Code (2003)], but when the [trial court] chooses to do so, giving the charge does not constitute reversible error when this single instruction is not unduly emphasized and the charge as a whole comports with the law."); State v. Hill, 394 S.C. 280, 297-300, 715 S.E.2d 368, 378-79 (Ct. App. 2011) (holding it was not reversible error for the trial court to give the "no corroboration" jury instruction from section 16-3-657 when the instruction was not unduly emphasized and the jury charge as a whole comported with the law). AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and KONDUROS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

State v. Stukes
(Jan 14, 2015)