State v. Long

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.

William Long, Appellant.

Appeal From Horry County

Edward B. Cottingham, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-166

Submitted February 1, 2012 – Filed March
7, 2012   

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A.
Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W.
Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Christina Catoe, all of Columbia; and
Solicitor J. Gregory Hembree, of Conway, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: William
Long appeals his convictions on two counts of armed robbery and one count of
possession of a weapon during a violent crime, arguing the trial court erred in
denying his motion for a mistrial when the wrong indictment was inadvertently
sent back to the jury.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Wilson, 389
S.C. 579, 585, 698 S.E.2d 862, 865 (Ct. App. 2010) ("The decision to grant or deny a mistrial is within the sound discretion of the trial
court.  The trial court's decision will not be overturned on appeal absent an
abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law." (quotation marks
omitted)); State v. Harris, 382 S.C. 107, 117, 674 S.E.2d 532, 537 (Ct.
App. 2009) ("A mistrial should only be granted when absolutely necessary,
and a defendant must show both error and resulting prejudice in order to be
entitled to a mistrial."); State v. Johnson, 298 S.C. 496,
497-98, 381 S.E.2d 732, 732 (1989) (holding that express consent to the
admission of evidence constitutes a waiver of the issue on appeal); State v.
Brown, 344 S.C. 70, 75, 543 S.E.2d 552, 554-55 (2001) (holding when other
properly admitted testimony revealed essentially the same information, the
exposure of the jury to improper evidence is harmless). 

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J.,
HUFF and SHORT, J.J., concur.

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