State v. Van Dillard

379 S.E.2d 115, 298 S.C. 171, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 76
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedApril 10, 1989
Docket22997
StatusPublished

This text of 379 S.E.2d 115 (State v. Van Dillard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Van Dillard, 379 S.E.2d 115, 298 S.C. 171, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 76 (S.C. 1989).

Opinion

Gregory, Chief Justice:

Appellant was indicted for two counts of criminal sexual conduct with a minor, one with a nine-year old male and one with an- eight-year-old female. He was convicted of criminal sexual conduct with the young male victim and acquitted of the other charge. The trial judge sentenced appellant to thirty years imprisonment. We affirm.

Appellant contends the trial judge erred in failing to conduct a competency examination of the young female and [172]*172in allowing her to testify. We find any error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Both children were allegedly abused while living in the same household with appellant. The young female testified in an unclear manner that appellant had sexually abused her. She further testified that the young male, her cousin, had told her appellant sexually abused him. She stated she heard her cousin crying after appellant removed him from the bed in which she and the young boy were sleeping.

Appellant was acquitted of the alleged sexual conduct with the young female. Admission of the testimony regarding her alleged abuse was clearly without prejudice. Her testimony regarding the sexual abuse of her cousin was merely cumulative to the young boy’s own detailed account of how appellant forced him to submit to anal intercourse. We find any error in the admission of this testimony harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. South, 285 S. C. 529, 331 S. E. (2d) 775 (1985).

Accordingly, the judgment of the circuit court is

Affirmed.

Harwell, Chandler, Finney and Toal, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. South
331 S.E.2d 775 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
379 S.E.2d 115, 298 S.C. 171, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 76, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-van-dillard-sc-1989.