Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-UP-280 - State v. Abercrombie

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.

James Jermaine Abercrombie, Appellant.


Appeal From Greenville County
 Larry R. Patterson, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-280
Submitted May 3, 2010 – Filed May 20, 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, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Robert Mills Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: James Jermaine Abercrombie appeals his conviction for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute.  On appeal, Abercrombie contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict.  Abercrombie also asserts error in the jury instruction.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1.  As to whether the trial court erred in denying Abercrombie's motion for a directed verdict: State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006) (stating that when ruling on a motion for a directed verdict, the trial court is concerned with the existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its weight);  Id. (explaining a defendant is entitled to a directed verdict when the State fails to produce evidence of the offense charged); Id. at 292-93, 625 S.E.2d at 648 (providing when this court reviews the denial of a directed verdict motion it "views the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the State, and 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"). 

2.  As to whether the trial court erred in giving the jury instruction: In re McCracken, 346 S.C. 87, 92, 551 S.E.2d 235, 238 (2001) ("A bald assertion, without supporting argument, does not preserve an issue for appeal."). 

AFFIRMED.

KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.


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