State v. Quarles

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: July 1, 2015
• Docket: 2015-UP-317
• Status: Unpublished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 Tyrone Quarles, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2013-001159

Appeal From Aiken County Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-317 Heard April 15, 2015 – Filed July 1, 2015

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender LaNelle Cantey DuRant, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Christina Catoe Bigelow, both of Columbia; and Solicitor James Strom Thurmond, Jr., of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Michael Tyrone Quarles appeals his convictions for kidnapping and armed robbery, arguing the trial court erred by admitting a recording of the victim's 911 call and allowing it to be played for the jury. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Collins, 409 S.C. 524, 530, 534, 763 S.E.2d 22, 25, 27-28 (2014) (stating the admission of evidence, or its exclusion under Rule 403, SCRE, is within the trial court's sound discretion); State v. Gray, 408 S.C. 601, 608, 759 S.E.2d 160, 164 (Ct. App. 2014) (recognizing this court will not reverse the trial court's decision regarding a Rule 403 objection absent an abuse of discretion and resulting prejudice); State v. Stephens, 398 S.C. 314, 319-20, 728 S.E.2d 68, 71 (Ct. App. 2012) (noting this court must give great deference to the trial court's decision regarding Rule 403); State v. Shuler, 353 S.C. 176, 184-86, 577 S.E.2d 438, 442-43 (2003) (applying a Rule 403 analysis to assess the admissibility of a 911 tape).

AFFIRMED.

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