State v. Owens

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: May 18, 2011
• Docket: 2011-UP-220
• Status: Unpublished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.

Antionelle Owens, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Orangeburg County
 James C. Williams, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-220
Submitted May 1, 2011 – Filed May 18, 2011

---

AFFIRMED

---

Appellate Defender Elizabeth Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Mark Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe, Jr., of Summerville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Antionelle Owens appeals his convictions for first-degree attempted burglary and assault and battery with intent to kill.  He argues the trial court erred in failing to grant a mistrial because the State made closing arguments and introduced testimony and pictures identifying Owens as the assailant even though the State and trial court agreed he was not entitled to a Neal v. Biggers hearing regarding those pictures. We affirm[1] pursuant to rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1.  As to the closing arguments: State v. Walker, 366 S.C. 643, 660, 623 S.E.2d 122, 131 (Ct. App. 2005) ("Failure to object to comments made during argument precludes appellate review of the issue.").

2.  As to the testimony and the pictures: State v. Johnson, 298 S.C. 496, 498, 381 S.E.2d 732, 733 (1989) (holding that express consent to the admission of evidence constitutes a waiver of the issue on appeal). 

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., HUFF and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

---

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