State v. Teasley

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: April 10, 2013
• Docket: 2013-UP-145
• Status: Unpublished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.

Chris Teasley, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2011-200308

Appeal From Greenville County Robin B. Stilwell, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-145 Submitted February 1, 2013 – Filed April 10, 2013

AFFIRMED

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

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Deputy Attorney General David A. Spencer, both of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006) ("When ruling on a motion for a directed verdict, the trial court is concerned with the existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its weight."); id. at 292-93, 625 S.E.2d at 648 ("If there is any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to prove the guilt of the accused, [this] [c]ourt must find the case was properly submitted to the jury."); State v. Dingle, 376 S.C. 643, 649, 659 S.E.2d 101, 105 (2008) ("In interpreting statutes, [this] [c]ourt looks to the plain meaning of the statute and the intent of the [l]egislature."); S.C. Code Ann. § 16-9-320(B) (2003) ("It is unlawful for a person to . . . assault, beat, or wound an officer when the person is resisting an arrest being made by one whom the person knows or reasonably should know is a law enforcement officer, whether under process or not." (emphasis added)); State v. Dowd, 306 S.C. 268, 270, 411 S.E.2d 428, 429 (1991) ("[A]n arrest is an ongoing process, finalized only when the defendant is properly confined.").

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

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