State v. Campbell

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: April 18, 2012
• Docket: 2012-UP-236
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

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. 

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Jonathan Millard Campbell, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Greenville County
Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-236 
Submitted April 2, 2012 – April 18, 2012

---

AFFIRMED

---

Senior Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz III, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and Assistant Attorney General Alphonso Simon Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor W. Walter Wilkins III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Jonathan M. Campbell appeals his conviction of murder, arguing the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on accessory after the fact of murder.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Benton, 338 S.C. 151, 156-57, 526 S.E.2d 228, 231 (2000) (holding that an appellant cannot argue one ground in support of a jury charge at trial and another ground in support of the charge on appeal).[2]

AFFIRMED.

PIEPER, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

---

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

[2] Alternatively, even if we were to find the issue on appeal preserved for review, we would affirm.  See State v. Dickerson, 395 S.C. 101, 121, 716 S.E.2d 895, 906 (2011) ("[A] defendant is not entitled to a charge on lesser-related offenses.").