From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Chambers

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Jul 1, 2015
2015-UP-335 (S.C. Ct. App. Jul. 1, 2015)

Opinion

2015-UP-335

07-01-2015

The State, Respondent, v. Hayword Tony Chambers, Appellant. Appellate Case No. 2012-213554

Jay T. Thompson, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, and Chief Appellate Defender Robert Michael Dudek, both of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Deputy Attorney General David A. Spencer, both of Columbia; and Ernest Adolphus Finney, III, of Sumter, all for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Heard November 5, 2014

Appeal From Cherokee County Roger L. Couch, Circuit Court Judge

Jay T. Thompson, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, and Chief Appellate Defender Robert Michael Dudek, both of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Deputy Attorney General David A. Spencer, both of Columbia; and Ernest Adolphus Finney, III, of Sumter, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Hayword Tony Chambers was indicted for murder. The jury found him guilty of the lesser-included crime of voluntary manslaughter. Chambers appeals, challenging (1) the admission of testimony during the State's rebuttal case that Chambers hit another man in the head with a gun when the man refused to give Chambers drugs in exchange for a car ride, and (2) the trial court's decision to submit the crime of voluntary manslaughter to the jury. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to Chambers' argument the trial court erred in admitting the testimony, see State v. Black, 400 S.C. 10, 16-17, 732 S.E.2d 880, 884 (2012) ("To warrant reversal [for the admission of evidence], an error must result in prejudice to the appealing party."); State v. Tapp, 398 S.C. 376, 389, 728 S.E.2d 468, 475 (2012) ("Whether an error is harmless depends on the circumstances of the particular case. No definite rule of law governs this finding; rather, the materiality and prejudicial character of the error must be determined from its relationship to the entire case. Error is harmless when it could not reasonably have affected the result of the trial." (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)); 398 S.C. at 389-90, 728 S.E.2d at 475 ("Engaging in this harmless error analysis, we . . . question . . . whether beyond a reasonable doubt the trial error did not contribute to the guilty verdict."); State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 288, 625 S.E.2d 641, 646 (2006) ("The improper admission of [evidence] is reversible error only when the admission causes prejudice.").

2. As to Chambers' argument the trial court erred in charging the jury as to voluntary manslaughter, see State v. Sams, 410 S.C. 303, 309, 764 S.E.2d 511, 514 (2014) ("Voluntary and involuntary manslaughter are both lesser-included offenses of murder."); 410 S.C. at 308, 764 S.E.2d at 513 ("The law to be charged to the jury is determined by the evidence presented at trial.").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C. J, and HUFF and LOCKEMY, JJ, concur


Summaries of

State v. Chambers

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Jul 1, 2015
2015-UP-335 (S.C. Ct. App. Jul. 1, 2015)
Case details for

State v. Chambers

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. Hayword Tony Chambers, Appellant. Appellate Case…

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Jul 1, 2015

Citations

2015-UP-335 (S.C. Ct. App. Jul. 1, 2015)