State v. Sturgeon

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.

Brian Sturgeon, Appellant.

---

Appeal from Greenville County
Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-531
Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed December 2, 2011   

---

AFFIRMED

---

Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek and Senior Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, both of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor W. Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Brian Sturgeon appeals his conviction for voluntary manslaughter, arguing the circuit court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v. Staten, 364 S.C. 7, 41, 610 S.E.2d 823, 841 (Ct. App. 2005) (holding an issue relating to a jury charge is not preserved for appellate review unless a party either requested the charge and obtained a ruling or objected on specific grounds to the charge as given), vacated in part by, 374 S.C. 9, 647 S.E.2d 207 (2007) (vacating Court of Appeals' analysis regarding Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)); see State v. Rios, 388 S.C. 335, 342, 696 S.E.2d 608, 612 (Ct. App. 2010) (holding the failure to object to the circuit court's decision not to charge involuntary manslaughter waived defendant's ability to seek appellate review on the issue).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

---

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