State v. Campbell

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.

Christopher D. Campbell, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2014-002339

Appeal From Charleston County
W. Jeffrey Young, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-367
Submitted May 1, 2016 – Filed July 20, 2016

AFFIRMED

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

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of
Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of
Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Brown, 362 S.C. 258, 262, 607 S.E.2d 93, 95 (Ct. App. 2004)
("To warrant reversal, a trial [court]'s refusal to give a requested jury charge must
be both erroneous and prejudicial to the defendant."); Sheppard v. State, 357 S.C.
646, 665, 594 S.E.2d 462, 472 (2004) ("In general, the trial court is required to
charge only the current and correct law of South Carolina."); id. at 665, 594 S.E.2d
at 472-73 ("A jury charge is correct if it contains the correct definition of the law
when read as a whole."); State v. Burkhart, 350 S.C. 252, 261, 565 S.E.2d 298, 303
(2002) ("The substance of the law must be charged to the jury, not particular
verbiage.").

AFFIRMED.1

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

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