State v. Hayward

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
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Valentino M. Hayward, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2015-002663

Appeal From Charleston County
Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2019-UP-112
Submitted February 1, 2019 – Filed March 20, 2019

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Susan Barber Hackett, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Senior
Assistant Deputy Attorney General Melody Jane Brown,
and Assistant Attorney General Susannah Rawl Cole, all
of Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of
Charleston, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Collins, 409 S.C. 524, 534, 763 S.E.2d 22, 27 (2014) ("The
relevancy, materiality, and admissibility of photographs as evidence are matters
left to the sound discretion of the trial court." (quoting State v. Nance, 320 S.C.
501, 508, 466 S.E.2d 349, 353 (1996))); id. ("As a general rule, all relevant
evidence is admissible."); State v. Gillian, 373 S.C. 601, 612, 646 S.E.2d 872, 878
(2007) ("Evidence is relevant if it tends to make more or less probable a fact in
issue."); State v. Wiles, 383 S.C. 151, 158, 679 S.E.2d 172, 176 (2009)
("Nonetheless, even where the evidence is shown to be relevant, if its probative
value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, the evidence
must be excluded."); State v. Adams, 354 S.C. 361, 378, 580 S.E.2d 785, 794 (Ct.
App. 2003) ("A trial [court's] decision regarding the comparative probative value
and prejudicial effect of evidence should be reversed only in exceptional
circumstances."); Collins, 409 S.C. at 534, 763 S.E.2d at 27 ("If the offered
photograph serves to corroborate testimony, it is not an abuse of discretion to
admit it." (quoting Nance, 320 S.C. at 508, 466 S.E.2d at 353)); id. at 536, 763
S.E.2d at 28 ("Where the State had the burden of proving the elements of the
offenses charged and there were no eyewitnesses to the incident resulting in the
victim's death, the photos . . . provide[] concrete evidence as to what transpired on
that fateful day.").

AFFIRMED. 1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and SHORT and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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