State v. Hyatt

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: July 1, 2015
• Docket: 2015-UP-326
• Status: Unpublished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.

Michael E. Hyatt, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2014-000083

Appeal From Lancaster County Brian M. Gibbons, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-326 Submitted March 1, 2015 – Filed July 1, 2015

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Susan Barber Hackett, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Christina Catoe Bigelow, both of Columbia; and Solicitor Douglas A. Barfield, Jr., of Kershaw, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Wilson, 345 S.C. 1, 5, 545 S.E.2d 827, 829 (2001) ("In criminal cases, the appellate court sits to review errors of law only."); id. ("We are bound by the trial court's factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous."); 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 [trial] court to charge only those matters necessary to answer the jury's request."); State v. Nichols, 325 S.C. 111, 118-19, 481 S.E.2d 118, 122 (1997) (holding a trial court's decision to recharge the jury on the offenses and refusal to recharge on self-defense because the jury did not specifically ask for clarification on self-defense was not error).

AFFIRMED.1

KONDUROS, LOCKEMY, and McDONALD, JJ., concur.

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