State v. Singleton

THIS OPINION HAS NO
PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY
PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Arthur L.
Singleton, Appellant.

Appeal From Sumter County

 Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-650

Submitted November 3, 2008 – Filed
December 1, 2008  

AFFIRMED

Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior
Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor
C. Kelly Jackson, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Arthur Singleton appeals his convictions for conspiracy and armed
robbery, arguing his due process rights to a fair trial were violated because
(1) potential jurors observed him being escorted into the courtroom wearing handcuffs,
and (2) he remained handcuffed during most of the jury selection with officers
from the Department of Corrections positioned behind him.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v.
Tucker, 320 S.C. 206, 209, 464 S.E.2d 105, 107 (1995) (stating the
decision to restrain a defendant during trial is within the trial court’s sound
discretion); State v. Moore, 257 S.C. 147, 153, 184 S.E.2d 546,
549 (1971) (explaining prejudice will not be presumed when the record
contains no evidence the minds of the jurors were prejudiced, apart from the
statement of an appellant’s counsel).

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, PIEPER, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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