State v. Barnes

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.

Steven Louis
Barnes, Appellant.

Appeal From Edgefield County

R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2010-UP-427

Submitted September 1, 2010 – Filed
October 11, 2010

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
and Assistant Attorney General Julie M. Thames, of Columbia; and Solicitor
Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER
CURIAM:  Steven Louis Barnes was convicted of throwing bodily
fluids and was sentenced to fifteen years' imprisonment.  On appeal, Barnes argues the trial
court abused its discretion in failing to declare a mistrial when the jury returned deadlocked twice. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and
the following authorities:  S.C. Code Ann. § 14-7-1330 (1976) (defining the procedure for when a jury fails to agree); Buff v. S.C. Dep't of Transp.,
342 S.C. 416, 422, 537 S.E.2d 279, 282 (2000) ("The jury's consent to resume or to discontinue deliberations is
determined, either expressly or impliedly, by its response to the trial judge's comments."); Id. ("Accordingly, when a jury has
twice indicated it is deadlocked, the trial judge should diplomatically discuss
with the jury whether further deliberations could be beneficial."); State v. Crim,
327 S.C. 254, 257, 489 S.E.2d 478, 479 (1997) ("It
is well-settled that the decision to grant or deny a mistrial is within the
sound discretion of the trial judge.").

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS,
and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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