State v. Eaglin

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.

Adrian Eaglin, Appellant.

Appeal From Lexington County

R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2012-UP-113

Submitted February 1, 2012 – Filed
February 29, 2012

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Tristan M. Shaffer, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald
J. Zelenka, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Adrian Eaglin appeals his conviction for
murder, arguing the jury charge unconstitutionally relieved the State of its
burden of proving malice.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Barber v. State,
393 S.C. 232, 236, 712 S.E.2d 436, 438 (2011) ("In reviewing jury charges
for error, we must consider the [trial] court's jury charge as a whole in light
of the evidence and issues presented at trial."); State v. Commander,
Op. No. 27062 (S.C. Sup. Ct. filed Oct. 31, 2011) (Shearouse Adv. Sh. No. 38 at
43, 59) ("An appellate court will not reverse the trial [court's] decision
regarding a jury charge absent an abuse of discretion." (internal
quotation marks omitted)); State v. Bell, 305 S.C. 11, 19, 406 S.E.2d
165, 170 (1991) (explaining malice defined as "the doing of a wrongful act
intentionally and without just cause or excuse" is the correct statement
of law and devoid of any presumption (internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

PIEPER, KONDUROS, and
GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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