State v. Glover

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.
David Glover, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2015-001144
Appeal From Aiken County
Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-025
Submitted October 1, 2016 – Filed January 11, 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 James Strom Thurmond, Jr., of
Aiken, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Brandt, 393 S.C. 526, 550, 713 S.E.2d 591, 603 (2011) ("An
appellate court will not reverse the trial [court]'s decision regarding a jury charge
absent an abuse of discretion."); Wilder v. State, 388 S.C. 282, 285, 696 S.E.2d
587, 588 (2010) ("An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court's ruling lacks
evidentiary support or where it is controlled by an error of law."); State v.
Harrison, 343 S.C. 165, 173, 539 S.E.2d 71, 75 (Ct. App. 2000) ("To warrant
reversal, a trial [court]'s refusal to give a requested jury charge must be both
erroneous and prejudicial."); State v. Barksdale, 311 S.C. 210, 216, 428 S.E.2d
498, 502 (Ct. App. 1993) ("When a jury requests an additional charge, it is
sufficient for the court to charge only those matters necessary to answer the jury's
request." (emphasis added)); State v. Anderson, 322 S.C. 89, 94, 470 S.E.2d 103,
106 (1996) (finding "the recharge was properly limited to answering the jury's
question").
AFFIRMED.1
LOCKEMY, C.J., and KONDUROS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.