State v. Hughes ( 2017 )

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.
Robert Dale Hughes, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2015-001073
Appeal From York County
John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-029
Submitted November 1, 2016 – Filed January 11, 2017
AFFIRMED
Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of
Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Jennifer Ellis Roberts, both of
Columbia; and Solicitor Kevin Scott Brackett, of York,
for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Tumbleston, 376 S.C. 90, 94, 654 S.E.2d 849, 851 (Ct. App.
2007) ("The trial [judge]'s factual conclusions as to the sufficiency of an
indictment will not be disturbed on appeal unless so manifestly erroneous as to
show an abuse of discretion."); Evans v. State, 363 S.C. 495, 508, 611 S.E.2d 510,
517 (2005) ("The primary purposes of an indictment are to put the defendant on
notice of what he is called upon to answer, i.e., to apprise him of the elements of
the offense and to allow him to decide whether to plead guilty or stand trial, and to
enable the [trial judge] to know what judgment to pronounce if the defendant is
convicted."); State v. McIntire, 221 S.C. 504, 509, 71 S.E.2d 410, 412 (1952)
("The true test of the sufficiency of an indictment is . . . whether it contains the
necessary elements of the offense intended to be charged[] and sufficiently
apprise[s] the defendant of what he must be prepared to meet.").
AFFIRMED.1
LOCKEMY, C.J., and KONDUROS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.