Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2009-UP-434 - State v. Ridel

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.

Eric John Ridel, Appellant.


Appeal From Sumter County
George C. James, Jr., Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-434
Heard September 1, 2009 – Filed September 9, 2009


AFFIRMED


Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster,  Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh,  Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, all of Columbia; and Solicitor C. Kelly Jackson, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  In this criminal matter, Eric John Ridel appeals his convictions and sentences for murder and failure to stop for a blue light resulting in death.  On appeal, Ridel asserts the trial court committed reversible error in: (1) admitting testimony that the victim had died and burned in the car; (2) allowing the State to replay a dispatch audio tape; (3) admitting additional photographs of the burned patrol car when nine photographs were already admitted into evidence; and (4) admitting evidence related to the dismantling of the burned patrol car. 

We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Issue 1: State v. Freiburger, 366 S.C. 125, 134, 620 S.E.2d 737, 741 (2005) (holding an issue is not preserved when one ground is raised to the trial court and another ground raised on appeal); State v. Haselden, 353 S.C. 190, 197, 577 S.E.2d 445, 448-49 (2003) (finding admission of improper evidence is harmless where the evidence is merely cumulative); Issue 2: State v. Holder, 382 S.C. 278, 289, 676 S.E.2d 690, 696 (2009) (holding the erroneous admission of evidence is harmless where, in view of the record as a whole, the impact of the evidence was minimal and the evidence was cumulative to other evidence admitted without objection); State v. Garner, 304 S.C. 220, 222, 403 S.E.2d 631, 632 (1991) (holding any error in the admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt); Issue 3: State v. Nichols, 325 S.C. 111, 121-22, 481 S.E.2d 118, 124 (1997) (upholding the admission of photographs on the ground they were not unduly gruesome nor prejudicial considering the facts and the material purpose for their introduction); State v. Schumpert, 312 S.C. 502, 507, 435 S.E.2d 859, 862 (1993) (holding any error in the admission of evidence that is merely cumulative is harmless); Issue 4: State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 212, 631 S.E.2d 262, 267-68 (2006) (finding harmless error where erroneously admitted testimony had minimal impact and other evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.