State v. Green

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Respondent,

v.

Bruce Green,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Beaufort County

Perry M. Buckner, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.
2003-UP-170 

Heard February 25, 2003 – Filed March
4, 2003

AFFIRMED

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of Columbia;
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
Assistant Attorney General W. Rutledge Martin, all of Columbia;  and Solicitor
Randolph  Murdaugh, III, of Hampton; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Bruce Green appeals
his conviction for first-degree burglary, for which he received a twenty-year
sentence.  He argues the trial court erred in admitting evidence of his
convictions for resisting arrest and fleeing to avoid arrest.  We affirm.

About 4:15 p.m. on July 29, 2000, Shalaya
Calhoun returned home to hear the sound of glass breaking as she stepped onto
her front porch.  When Calhoun went to investigate the cause of the sound,
she saw Green exiting the back door.  Green, a co-worker and friend,
ran past her.  Calhoun called 911 and reported the break-in.  She
told authorities she knew the intruder and provided a description.  About
nine dollars in quarters and a 1921 silver dollar were missing from a coffee
can.

Officer Robert Carson responded. 
Shortly afterward he went to nearby Marsh Road, where he saw another officer
struggling with Green.  Green was arrested.  A search incident
to Green’s arrest produced, among other things, a 1921 silver dollar, later
identified by Calhoun as the one that she kept in the coffee can inside her
home.

Officers found Green’s latent fingerprints on the
coffee can.  Shoe tracks on Calhoun’s back porch matched Green’s shoes.

At trial and following testimony from the officers
involved in Green’s arrest, the State called a witness to present documentation
of Green’s conviction on August 17, 2000, in the municipal court for fleeing
and resisting arrest.  Green objected on the ground of relevancy.  The trial
court refused to admit the evidence under State v. Lyle, [1] but admitted it as part of the
res gestae of the crime.

We agree with Green.  Evidence of his convictions
formed no part of the so-called res gestae of the offense of burglary.  The
convictions occurred almost a month later in a municipal courtroom.  By definition,
a conviction rendered by a court in a courtroom is not “[a] statement relating
to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress
of excitement caused by the event or condition.” [2]   They did not occur “substantially
contemporaneous[ly] with the litigated transaction”
[3] and were not “the instinctive, spontaneous utterances of the mind while
under the active, immediate influences of the transaction.”
[4]

Nevertheless, we hold the evidence was harmless
beyond a reasonable doubt, considering the other evidence of Green’s guilt. [5]   The owner whose home was burglarized knew Green and saw him
exit her back door; officers found property taken from the owner’s home on Green’s
person shortly after the burglary occurred; Green’s fingerprints matched those
found on a coffee can that had been stored inside the burglarized house; shoe
tracks matched his shoes; and the officers testified about Green’s resisting
arrest and fleeing the scene. 

AFFIRMED.            

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

[1]   125 S.C. 406, 118 S.E. 803 (1923).

[2]   Rule 803(2), SCRE; State
v. Sims, 348 S.C. 16, 21, 558 S.E.2d 518, 521 (2002).

[3]   State v. Long, 186 S.C.
439, 445, 195 S.E. 624, 626 (1938).

[4]   Id.

[5] oSee State v. Mitchell,
286 S.C. 572, 573, 336 S.E.2d 150, 151 (1985) (“Whether an error is harmless
depends on the particular circumstances of the case.”).