Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2008-UP-650 - State v. Singleton

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Arthur L. Singleton, Appellant.


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


Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-650
Submitted November 3, 2008 – Filed December 1, 2008  


AFFIRMED


Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor C. Kelly Jackson, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Arthur Singleton appeals his convictions for conspiracy and armed robbery, arguing his due process rights to a fair trial were violated because (1) potential jurors observed him being escorted into the courtroom wearing handcuffs, and (2) he remained handcuffed during most of the jury selection with officers from the Department of Corrections positioned behind him.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Tucker, 320 S.C. 206, 209, 464 S.E.2d 105, 107 (1995) (stating the decision to restrain a defendant during trial is within the trial court’s sound discretion); State v. Moore, 257 S.C. 147, 153, 184 S.E.2d 546, 549 (1971) (explaining prejudice will not be presumed when the record contains no evidence the minds of the jurors were prejudiced, apart from the statement of an appellant’s counsel).

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, PIEPER, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.


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