State v. Hamilton

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Appellant,

v.

Daniel Paul Hamilton,       
Respondent.

Appeal From Greenville County

Joseph J. Watson , Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2003-UP-246

Submitted January 29, 2003 - Filed April
2, 2003 

REVERSED

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman M. Rapoport, of Columbia; Solicitor
Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville; for Appellant.

Michael  Barcroft, of Greenville; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: The State appeals the circuit court’s
decision to reverse a magistrate’s court conviction for reckless driving.  The
State argues that the circuit judge erred in reversing because sufficient evidence
existed to support the conviction.  We agree and  reverse
[1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and the following authorities: State
v. Kelsey, 331 S.C. 50, 62, 502 S.E.2d 63, 69 (1998) (If there is any direct
evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to establish
the guilt of the accused, an appellate court must find that the case was properly
submitted to the jury); State v. Huggins, 325 S.C. 103, 110, 481 S.E.2d
114, 118 (1997) (stating that evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable
to the State when reviewing the denial of a motion for a directed verdict in
a criminal case); State v. Gilliam, 270 S.C. 345, 242 S.E.2d 410 (1978)
(holding circuit court erred in reversing criminal conviction in magistrate’s
court where there was sufficient evidence to submit the case to the jury); State
v. Henderson, 347 S.C. 455, 457, 556 S.E.2d 691, 692 (Ct. App. 2001) (stating
that in criminal appeals from magistrate or municipal court, the circuit court
does not conduct a de novo review, but instead reviews for preserved
error raised to it by appropriate exception); State v. Head, 330 S.C.
79, 87, 498 S.E.2d 389, 393 (Ct. App. 1997) (same); S.C. Code Ann. § 18-3-70
(1986) (setting forth the appeals process for reckless driving); S.C. Code Ann.
§ 56-5-2920 (1991) (“Any person who drives any vehicle in such a manner as to
indicate either a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property
is guilty of reckless driving.”).

REVERSED.

HEARN, C.J., GOOLSBY and SHULER, JJ., concur.

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