Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2011-UP-145 - State v. Grier

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
n The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Samuel Jamar Grier, Appellant.


Appeal From Georgetown County
Michael G. Nettles, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-145  
Submitted April 1, 2011 – Filed April 11, 2011


AFFIRMED


Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior and Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor J. Gregory Hembree, of Conway, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Samuel Jamar Grier appeals his convictions for possession with the intent to distribute cocaine base and failure to stop for a blue light, arguing the trial court erred in denying his Batson[1] motion after the State struck all three African-American males called.  We affirm[2] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114, 123, 470 S.E.2d 366, 371 (1996) ("[T]he trial court's findings regarding purposeful discrimination are entitled to great deference and are to be set aside only if clearly erroneous."); id. at 124, 470 S.E.2d at 372 ("Once a racially neutral explanation is given, the party challenging the strikes must show the explanation is mere pretext for racial discrimination."). 

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, GEATHERS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.


[1] Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).

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