Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-UP-546 - State v. Dunovant

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.

Terry Arnail Dunovant, Appellant.


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


Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-546
Submitted December 1, 2010 – Filed December 16, 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 Assistant Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Kevin S. Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Terry Arnail Dunovant was convicted of kidnapping and two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct.  On appeal, Dunovant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict because the testimony of the alleged victim was not credible as a matter of law.   We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006) (explaining 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. at 292-93, 625 S.E.2d at 648 (stating if any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tends to prove the guilt of the accused, the appellate court must find the case was properly submitted to the jury).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. 


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