State v. Gardner

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.

Jerry Lewis Gardner, Jr., Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2015-002604

Appeal From Charleston County
Alison Renee Lee, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-221
Submitted May 1, 2017 – Filed May 24, 2017

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender LaNelle Cantey DuRant, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Vann Henry Gunter, Jr., both of
Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of
Charleston, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Adams, 354 S.C. 361, 377, 580 S.E.2d 785, 793 (Ct. App.
2003) ("The admission or exclusion of evidence is left to the sound discretion of
the trial [court]."); id. ("A [trial] court's ruling on the admissibility of evidence will
not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion or the commission of legal
error which results in prejudice to the defendant."); id. at 378, 580 S.E.2d at 793-94
("An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court's ruling is based on an error of
law."); State v. Collins, 409 S.C. 524, 534, 763 S.E.2d 22, 27 (2014) ("As a general
rule, all relevant evidence is admissible."); State v. Gillian, 373 S.C. 601, 612, 646
S.E.2d 872, 878 (2007) ("Evidence is relevant if it tends to make more or less
probable a fact in issue."); State v. Wiles, 383 S.C. 151, 158, 679 S.E.2d 172, 176
(2009) ("Nonetheless, even where the evidence is shown to be relevant, if its
probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, the
evidence must be excluded."); id. ("Unfair prejudice means an undue tendency to
suggest decision on an improper basis."); Adams, 354 S.C. at 378, 580 S.E.2d at
794 ("A trial [court's] decision regarding the comparative probative value and
prejudicial effect of evidence should be reversed only in exceptional
circumstances."); Gillian, 373 S.C. at 609, 646 S.E.2d at 876 ("The determination
of the prejudicial effect of the evidence must be based on the entire record and the
result will generally turn on the facts of each case.").1

AFFIRMED.2

GEATHERS, MCDONALD, and HILL, JJ., concur.

1
We note Rule 404(b), SCRE, does not apply to the admission of the redacted
sticky note because it was not evidence of "other crimes, wrongs, or acts."
2
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.