State v. Briscoe

THIS OPINION
HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN
ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Steven C.
Briscoe, Appellant.

Appeal From Dorchester County

Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-259

Submitted April 1, 2008 – Filed May 14,
2008 

AFFIRMED

Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Senior
Asst. Atty. Gen. William Edgar Salter, III, all of Columbia; and Solicitor
David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, for Respondent.

PER
CURIAM:  Steven Briscoe
appeals the circuit court’s denial of his motion to quash the jury pursuant to
his Batson[1] motion.  Briscoe asserts the State discriminated against both Native Americans
and African-Americans in its use of peremptory challenges.  We find no error in
the circuit court’s treatment of Briscoe’s Batson motion and affirm the
judgment and conviction of the circuit court pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR
and the following authorities:  Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986); State
v. Cochran, 369 S.C. 308, 631 S.E.2d 294 (Ct. App. 2006) (finding in an
appeal from the grant or denial of a Batson motion, appellate courts
give deference to the findings of the trial court and apply a clearly erroneous
standard); Purkett v.
Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (1995)
(stating the burden of production shifts to the proponent of the strike to come
forward with a race-neutral explanation); State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114, 470 S.E.2d 366 (1996) (adopting the procedures set forth in Purkett).

Accordingly,
the circuit court’s order is

AFFIRMED[2]

HEARN, C.J., and PIEPER, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

[1]  Batson
v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).

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