State v. Turner

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.

Crystal Turner, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2010-173406

Appeal From Horry County
Thomas W. Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-562
Submitted October 1, 2012 – Filed October 24, 2012

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Breen Richard Stevens, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Senior Assistant Deputy
Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney
General Christina J. Catoe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor
John Gregory Hembree, of Conway, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Crystal Turner appeals her conviction of accessory before the fact
of armed robbery, arguing the trial court erred in (1) admitting two photos of the
deceased victim into evidence when the robbery and death of the victim were
undisputed and (2) denying her motion for a directed verdict because the State
failed to prove Turner had knowledge a codefendant was armed. We affirm1
pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. The trial court did not err in admitting the two photographs because the
photographs corroborated witness testimony and the nature of the photographs did
not render them unduly prejudicial in the context of the issues in this case. See
State v. Torres, 390 S.C. 618, 622-23, 703 S.E.2d 226, 228 (2010) ("The relevance,
materiality, and admissibility of photographs are matters within the sound
discretion of the trial court and a ruling will be disturbed only upon a showing of
an abuse of discretion." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); State v.
Jarrell, 350 S.C. 90, 106, 564 S.E.2d 362, 371 (Ct. App. 2002) (holding the trial
court does not abuse its discretion if the offered photograph corroborates testimony
of a witness at trial).

2. The trial court did not err when it denied Turner's motion for a directed verdict
because several witnesses testified Turner (1) was in the parking lot when a co-
defendant openly displayed his gun the night of the robbery and (2) helped plan the
robbery. See State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292-93, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006)
("When reviewing a denial of a directed verdict, this Court views the evidence and
all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the state. If there is any
direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to
prove the guilt of the accused, the Court must find the case was properly submitted
to the jury."); State v. Greuling, 257 S.C. 515, 524, 186 S.E.2d 706, 709-10 (1972)
(holding that for a person to be an accessory before the fact, the State must prove
(1) the person "advised and agreed, or urged the parties or in some way aided" the
parties in the commission of the offense; (2) the person was not present when the
offense was committed; and (3) the principal committed the offense).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and WILLIAMS and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

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