Jamal Rashee A, In Interest of

• Decision Date: 06 April 1992
• Docket Number: No. 1814,1814
• Citation: 418 S.E.2d 326,308 S.C. 392
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
• Parties: In the Interest of JAMAL RASHEE A., a juvenile under the age of seventeen, Appellant. . Heard

Page 326

418 S.E.2d 326

308 S.C. 392

In the Interest of JAMAL RASHEE A., a juvenile under the age of seventeen, Appellant.

No. 1814.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard April 6, 1992.

Decided May 11, 1992.

Rehearing Denied June 30, 1992.

Gregg Meyers, of Wise and Cole, Charleston, for appellant.

Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Asst. Attys. Gen. Harold M. Coombs, Jr., and Amie L. Clifford, Columbia, and Sol. Charles Molony Condon, North Charleston, for respondent.

SHAW, Judge:

Appellant, a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent for the commission of first degree burglary and grand larceny. We reverse.

The record reveals the following undisputed facts. On November 5, 1990, at approximately 10:00 p.m., the McKnights were in their carriage house, where they were living while their main house was being renovated, when Mrs. McKnight heard noises in the attic area of the main house, directly above their carriage house bedroom. At that time, the attic was being used to store fixtures, appliances, tools and building materials for the renovation of the main house. Upon hearing the noises, Mrs. McKnight awoke her husband, who then heard the sounds as well. Mr. McKnight then entered the main house with a flashlight to light his way, other artificial light being inaccessible at that moment due to the renovations. He heard a loud thud, pointed the flashlight up some stairs and observed a black male approximately four feet away from him on the steps. He chased him up the steps where the person joined another individual and then followed the two out onto a porch. He stated he got a much better look at the face of the second individual out on the porch, as the first individual, a taller young man, almost immediately jumped from the second floor porch, while the second individual, a shorter young man "momentarily hesitated and then jumped from the second floor porch to the ground striking the first floor porch on the way down." After they jumped from the porch, Mr. McKnight was unable to visually observe them any longer. However, he stated that he "heard sounds of people getting on the bicycles and speeding off, and the rattling of the bicycles and that sort of thing." Mrs. McKnight testified that she was standing outside during this time and "saw two young men pedaling on their bicycles as fast as they could...." Mr. McKnight described the first youth he encountered as 5'6" or better and the second as 5'6" or less. Both boys had relatively short hair and one or both were wearing red tops and dark pants. He also stated he got a better look at the second youth, although "it was only a moments." Mrs. McKnight could only describe the individuals as wearing tennis shoes. Mrs. McKnight phoned the police and an officer arrived between 20 and 30 minutes after the incident.

Officer Lemon, with the City of Charleston Police Department, testified his team office received a call regarding this incident at 10:30 p.m. and, upon checking the area, he observed "two guys riding on a bike." He stated that one was operating the bicycle and the other was on the handle bar. He observed these individuals within one minute of receiving the 10:30 call. Officer Lemon detained the two juveniles and Mr. McKnight arrived at the location and indicated these were the same individuals he had seen in his house that night.

The defense presented the testimony of Evette Martin. Ms. Martin testified that on the night of November 5, 1990, between 10:00 and 10:35, the appellant was at the Hardee's where Ms. Martin worked. She stated that appellant and his friend arrived at 10:00, that the appellant went with her to take out the trash and she remembered him leaving at 10:35 because she was cleaning the lobby at the time and looked at a clock.

The defense also presented the testimony of a private investigator that testified over 500 red t-shirts had been recently distributed to area youth through an inner city program. The appellant testified on his own behalf. He stated he had never been in the McKnight residence. He further testified, on November 5, 1990, he left a friend's house with another friend around 10:00 p.m., went to Hardee's where he talked to Ms. Martin and helped her take the trash out, and left the Hardee's, shortly thereafter being stopped by the police.

A police department inventory of the appellant's clothing at the time of his detention indicates the appellant was wearing black shoes, white socks, black sweat pants and a white and pink t-shirt. The record further reveals, and the State stipulated that a hat was recovered at the scene of the crime and hair samples, voluntarily given by the appellant and the other suspect, were tested by SLED and determined to be microscopically inconsistent with hairs found on the hat.

The appellant contends the family court judge erred in finding the state proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. He argues the eyewitness identification was unreliable under the circumstances and this was the sole evidence supporting the trial judge's adjudication. We agree.

Following the closing of all evidence, the trial judge stated as follows:

I have tried very hard to consider all of the evidence which has been...