Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-005 - State v. Brown

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals


The State,        Respondent,

v.

Steve W. Brown,        Appellant.


Appeal From Sumter County
Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-005
Submitted January 12, 2004 – Filed January 14, 2004


AFFIRMED


M. M. Weinberg, III, of Sumter, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson, Assistant Attorney General David A. Spencer, all of Columbia;  and Solicitor Cecil Kelley Jackson, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:          Affirmed pursuant to South Carolina Rules of Appellate Practice, Rule 220, and the following authorities: As to Issue I: State v. Pinckney, 339 S.C. 346, 349, 529 S.E.2d 526, 527 (2000) (“In reviewing a refusal to grant a directed verdict, [an appellate court] must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and determine whether there is any direct or substantial circumstantial evidence that reasonably tends to prove the defendant’s guilt or from which his guilt may be logically deduced.”); see State v. Morgan, 282 S.C. 409, 411, 319 S.E.2d 335, 336 (1984) (“Upon a motion for a directed verdict . . . , the trial judge is concerned with the existence of evidence and not its weight.”).

As to Issue II:  State v. Hughey, 339 S.C. 439, 450, 529 S.E.2d 721, 727 (2000) (holding a circuit court’s failure to give a requested jury charge must be erroneous and prejudicial to warrant reversal); State v. Foust, 325 S.C. 12, 16, 479 S.E.2d 50, 52 (1996) (holding a charge that is substantially correct and covers the law does not require reversal); State v. Kerr, 330 S.C. 132, 144, 498 S.E.2d 212, 218 (Ct. App. 1998) (holding when reviewing a circuit court’s instruction to the jury, the charge must be considered in its entirety).

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.