From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Johnson

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
May 2, 2012
Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-264     (S.C. Ct. App. May. 2, 2012)

Opinion

2012-UP-264

05-02-2012

The State, Respondent, v. David Mario Johnson, Appellant.

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Christina T. Adams, of Anderson, for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Submitted March 1, 2012

Appeal From Anderson County R. Lawton McIntosh, Circuit Court Judge.

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Christina T. Adams, of Anderson, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

David Mario Johnson appeals his convictions for trafficking in cocaine and possession of marijuana, arguing the trial court erred in admitting his statement into evidence. Specifically, Johnson avers the police procured his statement through a promise of leniency. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Saltz, 346 S.C. 114, 136, 551 S.E.2d 240, 252 (2001) ("When reviewing a trial court's ruling concerning voluntariness, this [court] does not reevaluate the facts based on its own view of the preponderance of the evidence, but simply determines whether the trial court's ruling is supported by any evidence."); United States v. Mashburn, 406 F.3d 303, 309-10 (4th Cir. 2005) (finding law enforcement officer's statement that defendant could only help himself by providing assistance to law enforcement did not constitute a promise of leniency).

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

AFFIRMED.

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


Summaries of

State v. Johnson

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
May 2, 2012
Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-264     (S.C. Ct. App. May. 2, 2012)
Case details for

State v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. David Mario Johnson, Appellant.

Court:THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: May 2, 2012

Citations

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-264     (S.C. Ct. App. May. 2, 2012)