State v. McArdle

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.

Theia Darion McArdle, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2016-000843

Appeal From Newberry County
Frank R. Addy, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-439
Submitted October 1, 2018 – Filed December 5, 2018

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General William Frederick Schumacher, IV,
both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Matthew Stumbo,
of Greenwood, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Bailey, 368 S.C. 39, 44, 626 S.E.2d 898, 901 (Ct. App. 2006)
("On appeal from the denial of a directed verdict, an appellate court must view the
evidence in the light most favorable to the State."); id. at 44-45, 626 S.E.2d at 901
("When ruling on a motion for a directed verdict, the trial court is concerned with
the existence of evidence, not its weight."); S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-85(A)(1)
(2015) ("A person is guilty of homicide by child abuse if the person . . . causes the
death of a child under the age of eleven while committing child abuse or neglect,
and the death occurs under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to
human life."); State v. Lollis, 343 S.C. 580, 584, 541 S.E.2d 254, 256 (2001) ("If
there is any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably
tending to prove the guilt of the accused, an appellate court must find the case was
properly submitted to the jury."); State v. Nesmith, 213 S.C. 60, 67, 48 S.E.2d 595,
598 (1948) ("Direct evidence is testimony, which if believed, tends directly to
prove a fact in issue. Circumstantial evidence on the other hand, while not tending
directly to prove a fact in issue[,] gives rise to a legal inference that such a fact
does exist.").

AFFIRMED. 1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and THOMAS and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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