State v. Sturgeon

Full title: The State, Respondent, v. Brian Sturgeon, Appellant.

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

Date published: Dec 2, 2011

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-531 (S.C. Ct. App. Dec. 2, 2011)

Opinion

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-531

12-02-2011

The State, Respondent, v. Brian Sturgeon, Appellant.

Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek and Senior Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, both 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 Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor W. Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

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

Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek and Senior Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, both 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 Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor W. Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM : Brian Sturgeon appeals his conviction for voluntary manslaughter, arguing the circuit court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter. We affirm¹ pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Staten, 364 S.C. 7, 41, 610 S.E.2d 823, 841 (Ct. App. 2005) (holding an issue relating to a jury charge is not preserved for appellate review unless a party either requested the charge and obtained a ruling or objected on specific grounds to the charge as given), vacated in part by, 374 S.C. 9, 647 S.E.2d 207 (2007) (vacating Court of Appeals' analysis regarding Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)); see State v. Rios, 388 S.C. 335, 342, 696 S.E.2d 608, 612 (Ct. App. 2010) (holding the failure to object to the circuit court's decision not to charge involuntary manslaughter waived defendant's ability to seek appellate review on the issue).

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

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.