State v. Dunovant

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.

Terry Arnail Dunovant, Appellant.

Appeal From York County

 John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-546

Submitted December 1, 2010 – Filed
December 16, 2010   

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, 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 Kevin S. Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Terry Arnail
Dunovant was convicted of kidnapping and two counts of first-degree criminal
sexual conduct.  On appeal, Dunovant argues the trial court erred in denying
his motion for a directed verdict because the testimony of the alleged victim
was not credible as a matter of law.   We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: State v.
Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006) (explaining when
ruling on a motion for a directed verdict, the trial court is concerned with
the existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its weight); Id. at
292-93, 625 S.E.2d at 648 (stating if any direct evidence or any substantial
circumstantial evidence reasonably tends to prove the guilt of the accused, the
appellate court must find the case was properly submitted to the jury).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF,
KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. 

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