State v. Edwards

CourtListener 10155622Scctapp27 de abr. de 2009

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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Denise Edwards, Appellant.

Appeal From Florence County

 Paul M. Burch, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2009-UP-170

Submitted April 1, 2009 – Filed April 27,
2009

AFFIRMED

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

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and
Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Edgar
L. Clements, III, of Florence, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: 
Denise Edwards appeals her convictions and sentences for murder and homicide by
child abuse.  Edwards argues the trial court erred by refusing to require the
State to elect between the charges of murder and homicide by child abuse, and
by admitting hearsay testimony from an expert witness.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR,
and the following authorities:  State v. Hall, 280 S.C. 74, 77, 310
S.E.2d 429, 431 (1983) (explaining our Supreme Court “has held on numerous
occasions that ‘when a single act combines the requisite ingredients of two
distinct offenses, the defendant may be severally indicted and punished for
each’”) (quoting State v. Steadman, 216 S.C. 579, 589, 59 S.E.2d 168,
171 (1950)); State v. Northcutt, 372 S.C. 207, 215, 641 S.E.2d 873, 877
(2007) (holding “[h]omicide by child abuse is not a lesser included offense of
murder” because murder does not include the element of the victim being eleven
or younger); Jackson v. Speed, 326 S.C. 289, 305, 486 S.E.2d 750, 758
(1997) (“Where the hearsay is merely cumulative to other evidence, its
admission is harmless.”). 

AFFIRMED.[1]

HUFF, WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

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