State v. Taylor

THIS OPINION
HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN
ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Jimmy R. Taylor, Appellant.

Appeal From Orangeburg County

 Diane S. Goodstein, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-148

Submitted March 2, 2009 – Filed March 30,
2009  

AFFIRMED

Everett K. Chandler, of Aiken, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant
Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor David M.
Pascoe, of Orangeburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Jimmy R. Taylor appeals his conviction
for felony driving under the influence.  Taylor alleges the trial court erred
in admitting the testimony of the State’s expert witness after the State
allegedly violated a pre-trial agreement concerning the subject of the expert
testimony.  We affirm
pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:    State v. Jamison, 372 S.C. 649, 652, 643
S.E.2d 700, 701 (Ct. App. 2007) (“The qualification of a witness as an expert
and the admissibility of his or her testimony are matters left to the sound
discretion of the trial judge, whose decision will not be reversed on appeal
absent an abuse of that discretion and prejudice to the opposing party.”); State
v. Johnson, 306 S.C. 119, 127-28, 410 S.E.2d 547, 552-53 (1991) (holding
there is no reversible error where the defendant fails to demonstrate prejudice
resulting from the violation of a pre-trial agreement with the solicitor and
the solicitor attempts in good faith to comply with the agreement). 

AFFIRMED.[1]

HEARN,
C.J., PIEPER and LOCKEMY, concur.

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