State v. Carlos Antone Bolt ( 2009 )

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.

Carlos Antone Bolt, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Greenville County
John C. Few, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-617
Submitted December 1, 2009 – Filed December 22, 2009

---

AFFIRMED

---

J. Falkner Wilkes, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General A. West Lee, all of Columbia; Solicitor Robert Mills Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Carlos Antone Bolt appeals his conviction for armed robbery.  On appeal, he argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  S.C. Code Ann. § 16-11-330(A) (2003) (stating armed robbery occurs when a person commits robbery while either armed with a deadly weapon or alleging to be armed by the representation of a deadly weapon); State v. Mitchell, 382 S.C. 1, 6, 675 S.E.2d 435, 438 (2009) (holding "[a robbery] occurs not only if the perpetrator uses force or intimidation to take possession of the property, but also if force or intimidation is used to retain possession immediately after the taking, or to carry away the property, or to facilitate escape"); State v. Muldrow, 348 S.C. 264, 559 S.E.2d 847 (2002) (holding the State must show evidence corroborating the allegation of being armed, such as the use of a physical representation of a deadly weapon).

AFFIRMED.

Williams, Pieper, and Lockemy, JJ., concur. 

---

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