State v. Lowrance

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.

Patrick Lowrance, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2012-213300

Appeal From Greenville County Steven H. John, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-439 Heard September 9, 2014 – Filed December 3, 2014

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for Appellant.

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

PER CURIAM: Patrick Lowrance appeals his conviction for possession of a stolen vehicle, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict because the evidence was insufficient to show the vehicle was stolen. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Lane, 406 S.C. 118, 121, 749 S.E.2d 165, 167 (Ct. App. 2013) ("If there is any direct evidence, or if there is substantial circumstantial evidence, which reasonably tends to prove the defendant's guilt, an appellate court must find the trial court properly submitted the case to the jury."); id. ("On appeal from the denial of a directed verdict, an appellate court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State.").

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, GEATHERS, and McDONALD, JJ., concur.