State v. Carlos Antone Bolt

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.

Carlos Antone Bolt, Appellant.

Appeal From Greenville County

John C. Few, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-617

Submitted December 1, 2009 – Filed
December 22, 2009

AFFIRMED

J. Falkner Wilkes, of Greenville, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General A. West Lee, all of Columbia; Solicitor
Robert Mills Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Carlos Antone Bolt appeals his
conviction for armed robbery.  On appeal, he argues the trial court erred in
denying his motion for a directed verdict.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR,
and the following authorities:  S.C. Code Ann. § 16-11-330(A)
(2003) (stating armed robbery occurs when
a person commits robbery while either armed with a deadly weapon or alleging to
be armed by the representation of a deadly weapon); State
v. Mitchell, 382 S.C. 1, 6, 675
S.E.2d 435, 438 (2009) (holding "[a robbery] occurs not only if the
perpetrator uses force or intimidation to take possession of the property, but
also if force or intimidation is used to retain possession immediately after
the taking, or to carry away the property, or to facilitate escape"); State v. Muldrow, 348 S.C. 264, 559 S.E.2d
847 (2002) (holding the State must show evidence corroborating the allegation
of being armed, such as the use of a physical representation of a deadly
weapon).

AFFIRMED.

Williams, Pieper, and Lockemy, JJ., concur. 

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