State v. Wilder

CourtListener 10154188Scctapp9 de ago. de 2011

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

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.

Anthony D. Wilder, Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

 J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-385

Heard April 6, 2011 – Filed August 9, 2011   

AFFIRMED

Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John
McIntosh, Assistant Deputy General Attorney Donald J. Zelenka, Assistant Attorney
General J. Anthony Mabry, of Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of
Charleston, for Respondent.

PER
CURIAM: Anthony D. Wilder was
convicted of murder, assault and battery with intent to kill (ABWCK), two
counts of kidnapping, and first-degree burglary and sentenced to life
imprisonment.  Wilder appeals, arguing the trial court erred in allowing the
admission of DNA evidence collected from his pants.  Specifically, Wilder
contends the chain of custody and sloppy handling of his pants created a strong
chance the DNA evidence was contaminated, and therefore, totally unreliable.  We
affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to whether the trial
court erred in admitting the DNA evidence developed from Wilder's pants: State
v. Ramsey, 345 S.C. 607, 615, 550 S.E.2d 294, 298 (2001) (finding conflicting
theories of how evidence was collected and the potential for contamination
related did not render DNA evidence so tainted it was totally unreliable).

2. Assuming the trial court
erred in admitting the DNA evidence developed from Wilder's pants: State v.
Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 212-13, 631 S.E.2d 262, 267-68 (2006) (finding
error in admitting evidence of defendant's failure to stop for a blue light was
harmless because defendant was not prejudiced and other competent evidence
established defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt).    

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS,
GEATHERS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.