State v. Haworth

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: November 27, 2013
• Docket: 2013-UP-434
• Status: Unpublished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.

Nancy Haworth, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2012-210208

Appeal From Pickens County Brooks P. Goldsmith, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-434 Submitted October 1, 2013 – Filed November 27, 2013

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General John Benjamin Aplin, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Because there was both direct and circumstantial evidence in the record tending to prove Nancy Haworth was guilty of aiding and abetting and conspiring to distribute methamphetamine as described in section 44-53-375(B) of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2012), the decision of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Cherry, 361 S.C. 588, 593-94, 606 S.E.2d 475, 478 (2004) ("If there is any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to prove the guilt of the accused, an appellate court must find the case was properly submitted to the jury."); State v. Gaster, 349 S.C. 545, 555, 564 S.E.2d 87, 92 (2002) (ruling an appellate court may reverse the trial court's denial of a motion for a directed verdict only "if there is no evidence to support the trial court's ruling"); State v. Massey, 267 S.C. 432, 442, 229 S.E.2d 332, 337 (1976) ("In deciding whether the trial court erred in failing to direct a verdict in favor of a defendant in a criminal case, [the appellate court] must view the testimony in the light most favorable to the State.").

AFFIRMED.1

WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

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