State v. Meadows ( 2016 )

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.
Christopher Lee Meadows, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2014-000394
Appeal From Pickens County
James R. Barber, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-033
Submitted November 1, 2015 – Filed January 20, 2016
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender David Alexander, of Columbia, for
Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Interim
Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General John
Benjamin Aplin, both of Columbia; and Solicitor
William Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Price, 368 S.C. 494, 498, 629 S.E.2d 363, 365 (2006) ("The
decision to admit or exclude testimony from an expert witness rests within the trial
court's sound discretion."); id. ("The trial court's decision to admit expert testimony
will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion."); id. ("An abuse of
discretion occurs when the trial court's ruling is based on an error of law or a
factual conclusion that is without evidentiary support."); Rule 702, SCRE ("If
scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to
understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an
expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto
in the form of an opinion or otherwise."); State v. Brown, 411 S.C. 332, 339, 768
S.E.2d 246, 250 (Ct. App. 2015) ("Expert testimony may be used to help the jury
to determine a fact in issue based on the expert's specialized knowledge,
experience, or skill and is necessary in cases in which the subject matter falls
outside the realm of ordinary lay knowledge." (quoting Watson v. Ford Motor Co.,
389 S.C. 434, 445, 699 S.E.2d 169, 175 (2010))); State v. Weaverling, 337 S.C.
460, 474, 523 S.E.2d 787, 794 (Ct. App. 1999) ("Expert testimony concerning
common behavioral characteristics of sexual assault victims and the range of
responses to sexual assault encountered by experts is admissible."); id. at 475, 523
S.E.2d at 794 ("Such testimony is relevant and helpful in explaining to the jury the
typical behavior patterns of adolescent victims of sexual assault."); id. ("It assists
the jury in understanding some of the aspects of the behavior of victims and
provides insight into the sexually abused child's often strange demeanor.").
AFFIRMED.1
SHORT, GEATHERS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.