State v. Sparkman

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.

Cory Lamont Sparkman, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2018-000172

Appeal From Charleston County
Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-212
Submitted June 1, 2020 – Filed July 8, 2020

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Susan Barber Hackett, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General W. Jeffrey Young, Deputy Attorney
General Donald J. Zelenka, Senior Assistant Deputy
Attorney General Melody Jane Brown, and Assistant
Attorney General Sherrie Butterbaugh, all of Columbia,
and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston, all for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Cory Lamont Sparkman appeals from his convictions for two
counts of murder and one count of armed robbery, arguing the trial court erred in
(1) denying his request for resentencing where he received a mandatory sentence
of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole, and (2) denying him an
opportunity to present or proffer evidence regarding the parole board's decision-
making process. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Finley, 427 S.C. 419, 427-28, 831 S.E.2d 158, 162-63 (2019)
(holding that because Finley's life sentence afforded him parole eligibility after the
service of 30 years' imprisonment, any potential Eighth Amendment violation was
cured, and the circuit court did not err in denying Finley's motion for
resentencing); State v. Hatcher, 392 S.C. 86, 91, 708 S.E.2d 750, 753 (2011) ("The
admission of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court and will not be
reversed absent an abuse of discretion." (quoting State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201,
208, 631 S.E.2d 262, 265 (2006))); id. ("An abuse of discretion occurs when the
conclusions of the trial court either lack evidentiary support or are controlled by an
error of law." (quoting Pagan, 369 S.C. at 208, 631 S.E.2d at 265)).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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