State v. Maybin ( 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.
Sterling Maybin, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2015-001585
Appeal From Newberry County
Donald Bruce Hocker, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-319
Submitted June 1, 2017 – Filed August 2, 2017
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Laura Ruth Baer, of Columbia, for
Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Susan Ranee Saunders, both of
Columbia; and Solicitor David Matthew Stumbo, of
Greenwood, all for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Harris, 382 S.C. 107, 117, 674 S.E.2d 532, 537 (Ct. App.
2009) ("The decision to grant or deny a mistrial is within the sound discretion of
the trial court. The trial court's decision will not be overturned on appeal absent an
abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law." (citation omitted)); State v.
Stanley, 365 S.C. 24, 34, 615 S.E.2d 455, 460 (Ct. App. 2005) (explaining a court
should grant a mistrial only when "'absolutely necessary,' and a defendant must
show both error and resulting prejudice in order to be entitled to a mistrial"
(quoting State v. Harris, 340 S.C. 59, 63, 530 S.E.2d 626, 628 (2000))); Rule
404(b), SCRE ("Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to
prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith.");
State v. Page, 378 S.C. 476, 482, 663 S.E.2d 357, 360 (Ct. App. 2008) ("It is
firmly established that otherwise inadmissible evidence may be properly admitted
when opposing counsel opens the door to that evidence."); State v. Beam, 336 S.C.
45, 53, 518 S.E.2d 297, 301 (Ct. App. 1999) ("A party may not complain of error
caused by his own conduct."); Page, 378 S.C. at 483, 663 S.E.2d at 360 ("Whether
a person opens the door to the admission of otherwise inadmissible evidence
during the course of a trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial
[court]."); State v. McEachern, 399 S.C. 125, 137, 731 S.E.2d 604, 610 (Ct. App.
2012) ("When a party introduces evidence about a particular matter, the other party
is entitled to introduce evidence in explanation or rebuttal thereof, even if the latter
evidence would have been incompetent or irrelevant had it been offered initially.").
AFFIRMED.1
LOCKEMY, C.J., and HUFF and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.