State v. Gallman

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.

Dominic Gallman, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-006

Submitted October 1, 2010 – Filed January
20, 2011

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald
J. Zelenda, Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, and Solicitor W. Barney
Giese, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Dominic
Gallman appeals his convictions for three counts of murder, burglary in the
first degree, armed robbery, and kidnapping.  We affirm[1] pursuant
to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Issue 1:  State v. Council, 335 S.C. 1, 13,
515 S.E.2d 508, 514 (1999) (finding a trial court should first exhaust other
methods to cure possible prejudice before aborting a trial); State v. Walker,
366 S.C. 643, 658, 623 S.E.2d 122, 129 (Ct. App. 2005) (stating a curative
instruction is usually deemed to have cured any alleged error).  Issue 2: State
v. Allen, 269 S.C. 233, 242, 237 S.E.2d 64, 68 (1977) (holding overwhelming
proof of guilt rendered harmless any error in the admission of the evidence in
question).  Issue 3: Rule 613(b), SCRE (providing for admission of a prior
inconsistent statement if the witness does not admit making the statement);   State v. Carmack, 388 S.C. 190, 201,
694 S.E.2d 224, 229-30 (Ct. App. 2010) (finding where the witness has responded with
anything less than an unequivocal admission, trial courts are granted wide
latitude to allow extrinsic evidence proving the statement).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS,
and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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