State v. Bishop ( 2014 )

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.
Douglas Bret Bishop, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2012-212240
Appeal From Union County
John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-217
Submitted April 1, 2014 – Filed June 11, 2014
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Susan Barber Hackett, of Columbia,
for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of
Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Logan, 405 S.C. 83, 90, 747 S.E.2d 444, 448 (2013) ("In
reviewing jury charges for error, this [c]ourt considers the trial court's jury charge
as a whole and in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial."); State v.
Mattison, 388 S.C. 469, 479, 697 S.E.2d 578, 583 (2010) ("The trial court is
required to charge only the current and correct law of South Carolina."); State v.
Aleksey, 343 S.C. 20, 27, 538 S.E.2d 248, 251 (2000) ("[J]ury instructions should
be considered as a whole, and if as a whole they are free from error, any isolated
portions which may be misleading do not constitute reversible error.").
AFFIRMED.1
WILLIAMS, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.