State v. Glover

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.

David Glover, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2015-001144

Appeal From Aiken County Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-025 Submitted October 1, 2016 – Filed January 11, 2017

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Laura Ruth Baer, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Susan Ranee Saunders, both of Columbia; and Solicitor James Strom Thurmond, Jr., of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Brandt, 393 S.C. 526, 550, 713 S.E.2d 591, 603 (2011) ("An appellate court will not reverse the trial [court]'s decision regarding a jury charge absent an abuse of discretion."); Wilder v. State, 388 S.C. 282, 285, 696 S.E.2d 587, 588 (2010) ("An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court's ruling lacks evidentiary support or where it is controlled by an error of law."); State v. Harrison, 343 S.C. 165, 173, 539 S.E.2d 71, 75 (Ct. App. 2000) ("To warrant reversal, a trial [court]'s refusal to give a requested jury charge must be both erroneous and prejudicial."); State v. Barksdale, 311 S.C. 210, 216, 428 S.E.2d 498, 502 (Ct. App. 1993) ("When a jury requests an additional charge, it is sufficient for the court to charge only those matters necessary to answer the jury's request." (emphasis added)); State v. Anderson, 322 S.C. 89, 94, 470 S.E.2d 103, 106 (1996) (finding "the recharge was properly limited to answering the jury's question").

AFFIRMED.1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and KONDUROS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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