State v. Turner ( 2012 )

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.

Phillip Marlon Turner, Appellant.

---

Appeal from Dorchester County
Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No.  2012-UP-263
Submitted April 2, 2012 – Filed May 2, 2012 

---

AFFIRMED

---

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe Jr., of Summerville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Phillip Marlon Turner appeals his conviction of assault and battery with intent to kill, arguing the trial court erred in allowing the State, on re-direct examination, to introduce a witness's statement when Turner had not introduced any portion of the statement.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Wiles, 383 S.C. 151, 156, 679 S.E.2d 172, 175 (2009) (holding to preserve an issue regarding the admissibility of evidence, a contemporaneous objection must be made).[2] 

AFFIRMED.

PIEPER, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

---

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

[2] Even if we were to find the issue preserved, we would affirm.  See State v. Patterson, 367 S.C. 219, 227-28, 625 S.E.2d 239, 243 (Ct. App. 2006) (holding fundamental fairness required an entire statement to police to be admitted into evidence pursuant to Rule 106, SCRE, after defense counsel made certain inquiries about the statement, opening the door to its admission).