Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-UP-010 - The State v. Barry Williams

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.

Barry Dewayne Williams, Appellant.


Appeal From Greenwood County
John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-010
Submitted January 4, 2010- Filed January 21, 2010   


AFFIRMED


Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Julie M. Thames, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Jerry W. Peace, of Greenwood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Barry Dewayne Williams was convicted of distribution of crack cocaine and distribution of crack cocaine within proximity of a public playground or park.  The trial court sentenced Williams to concurrent terms of thirty years on the distribution charge and fifteen years on the proximity charge.  Williams appeals arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR and the following authorities:  State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006) ( in ruling on a motion for a directed verdict, a trial court is concerned with the existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its weight); State v. McHoney, 344 S.C. 85, 97, 544 S.E.2d 30, 36 (2001) (noting that, in regard to appellant’s argument the State’s case was based on unreliable evidence, in ruling on a directed verdict motion the trial court is concerned with the existence of evidence, not its weight); State v. Hernandez, 382 S.C. 620, 624, 677 S.E.2d 603, 605 (2009) (on appeal from the trial court’s denial of a motion for a directed verdict, an appellate court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State); State v. Gaster, 349 S.C. 545, 555, 564 S.E.2d 87, 92 (2002) (an appellate court may only reverse the trial court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict if there is no evidence to support the trial court’s ruling); State v. Gaines, 380 S.C. 23, 32, 667 S.E.2d 728, 733 (2008) (if there is any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to prove the guilt of the accused, the appellate court must find the case was properly submitted to the jury).[1]

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, A.C.J., GEATHERS, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.


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