Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-UP-296 - State v. Waiters

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 Waiters, Jr., Appellant.


Appeal From Greenville County
G. Edward Welmaker, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-296
Submitted May 3, 2010 – Filed May 27, 2010   


AFFIRMED


J. Falkner Wilkes, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  James Waiters, Jr., appeals his convictions for two counts of armed robbery and possession of a firearm, arguing the trial court erred in denying his new trial motion.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v. Alexander, 303 S.C. 377, 383, 401 S.E.2d 146, 150 (1991) (abolishing the rule prohibiting inconsistent verdicts in criminal cases and finding a defendant suffers no prejudice from inconsistent verdicts in a criminal case); State v. Nichols, 325 S.C. 111, 123, 481 S.E.2d 118, 124 (1997) (finding the appeal of the denial of a new trial motion based on inconsistent verdicts lacked merit because the rule prohibiting inconsistent verdicts was abolished).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, SHORT, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.


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