From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Dodd

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
Apr 2, 2014
Appellate Case No. 2012-209187 (S.C. Ct. App. Apr. 2, 2014)

Opinion

Appellate Case No. 2012-209187 Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-151

04-02-2014

The State, Respondent, v. Antonio Lee Dodd, Appellant.

Appellate Defender Carmen Vaughn Ganjehsani, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, both of Columbia, for Respondent.


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.


Appeal From Greenville County

Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge


AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Carmen Vaughn Ganjehsani, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, both of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: 1. As to whether the trial court erred in charging the jury on "the hand of one is the hand of all" because the State failed to charge Dodd's alleged co-defendant: State v. Massey, 267 S.C. 432, 229 S.E.2d 332, 339 (1976) (adopting the reasoning "[i]f failure to apprehend the principal, his death or acquittal necessitates acquittal of the accessory, then our statute is no improvement over the common law. . . ."). 2. As to whether the trial court erred in charging the jury on "the hand of one is the hand of all" because the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support such a charge: State v. Mattison, 388 S.C. 469, 479, 697 S.E.2d 578, 584 (2010) ("An appellate court will not reverse the trial [court's] decision regarding a jury charge absent an abuse of discretion."); State v. Niles, 400 S.C. 527, 533, 735 S.E.2d 240, 243 (Ct. App. 2012) ("If any evidence supports a jury charge, the [trial] court should grant the request."); State v. Grippon, 327 S.C. 79, 84, 489 S.E.2d 462, 464 (1997) (noting the law makes no distinction between the weight or value to be given to direct or circumstantial evidence). AFFIRMED.

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

FEW, C.J., and SHORT and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Dodd

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
Apr 2, 2014
Appellate Case No. 2012-209187 (S.C. Ct. App. Apr. 2, 2014)
Case details for

State v. Dodd

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. Antonio Lee Dodd, Appellant.

Court:STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Apr 2, 2014

Citations

Appellate Case No. 2012-209187 (S.C. Ct. App. Apr. 2, 2014)