State v. Green

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.

Mack Green, Appellant.

Appeal From Hampton County

Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-253

Submitted April 1, 2010 – Filed April 26, 2010

AFFIRMED

Appellate
Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney
General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, 
Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, And Assistant
Attorney General Deborah R. J. Shupe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor I.
McDuffie Stone, III, of Beaufort, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Mack Green
appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. 
On appeal, Green argues the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury
on circumstantial evidence.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Rule 20(b),
SCRCrimP ("Notwithstanding any request for legal
instructions, the parties shall be given the opportunity to object to the giving
or failure to give an instruction before the jury retires, but out of the
hearing of the jury. . . . Failure to object in accordance with this rule shall
constitute a waiver of objection.");  State
v. Nichols, 325 S.C. 111, 118, 481
S.E.2d 118, 122 (1997) (finding the trial court erred in refusing to give a
charge requested after the charge conference and holding a party can ask for
further instructions after the charge conference); State v. Kelly, 372 S.C. 167, 171, 641 S.E.2d 468, 470 (Ct. App. 2007)
("An appellate court will not reverse the
trial court's decision regarding jury instructions unless the trial court
abused its discretion.  The requesting party must have been prejudiced by the
trial court's failure to give the instruction in order to warrant reversal on
appeal.").
AFFIRMED.

PIEPER
and GEATHERS, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

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