State v. Wright

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.

Barbara Wright, Appellant.

Appeal From Greenville County

Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2010-UP-571 

Submitted December 1, 2010 – Filed
December 31, 2010

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster,
Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney
General Salley W. Elliott, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman Mark
Rapoport, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Barbara
Wright appeals her conviction for filing a false police report, arguing the
trial court erred by (1) including in the jury instructions the statement that
armed robbery is a felony and (2) denying her motion for a directed verdict.  We
affirm.[1]

1. Wright argues the
trial court erred by including in the jury instructions a statement that armed
robbery is a felony because, by doing so, the trial court violated the South Carolina
Constitution.  We disagree.  Article V, section 21 of the South Carolina
Constitution states, "Judges shall not charge juries in respect to matters
of fact, but shall declare the law."  Armed robbery's status as a felony
is a matter of law rather than fact.  Accordingly, the trial court properly instructed the jury on that issue.

2. Wright next argues the trial court erred in denying
her motion for a directed verdict because the State failed to produce evidence
armed robbery was a felony to sustain the offense of filing a false police
report.  We disagree.  A reviewing court must uphold the denial of a directed
verdict where "there is any direct evidence or any substantial
circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to prove the guilt of the
accused . . . ."  State v. Weston, 367 S.C.
279, 292-93, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006).  The reviewing court views the
evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the state.  Id. at 292, 625 S.E.2d at 648.  Section 16-17-722(A) of the South Carolina
Code (2003) provides, "It is unlawful for a
person to knowingly file a false police report," and subsection
16-17-722(B) provides, "A person who violates subsection (A) by falsely
reporting a felony is guilty of a felony and upon conviction must be imprisoned
for not more than five years or fined not more than one thousand dollars, or
both."  The armed robbery statute of the South Carolina Code states,
"A person who commits robbery while armed with a . . . deadly
weapon . . . is guilty of a felony . . . ."  S.C.
Code. Ann. § 16-11-330(A) (2003).

Here, the State presented testimony that Wright reported a
man robbed the store with a knife and signed a statement saying she lied that a
robbery occurred.  Therefore, the State presented sufficient evidence to
sustain the offense of filing a false police report, and the trial court
properly denied Wright's motion for a directed verdict.

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS,
PIEPER, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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