State v. Addison, No. 25216.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtMOORE, Justice
Citation343 S.C. 290,540 S.E.2d 449
Decision Date11 December 2000
Docket NumberNo. 25216.
PartiesThe STATE, Respondent, v. Jerome ADDISON, Petitioner.

343 S.C. 290
540 S.E.2d 449

The STATE, Respondent,
v.
Jerome ADDISON, Petitioner

No. 25216.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Heard October 17, 2000.

Decided December 11, 2000.

Rehearing Denied January 10, 2001.


343 S.C. 291
Deputy Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of S.C. Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for petitioner

Attorney General Charles M. Condon, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Robert E. Bogan, all of Columbia, and Solicitor David P. Schwacke, N. Charleston, for respondent.

MOORE, Justice:

We granted a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' decision affirming petitioner's convictions for kidnapping and assault and battery with intent to kill.1 We affirm as modified herein.

343 S.C. 292
FACTS

At trial, Debra Brown (Victim) testified she was acquainted with petitioner and saw him on the night of February 14, 1996, at a bar she frequented. He offered her a ride home after she had had several drinks. On the way, Victim waited in the car while petitioner made a stop at a friend's house. When he returned to the car, he had drugs with him and was angry about being cheated.

Victim became frightened and tried to get out of the car but petitioner restrained her. He drove to a wooded area where he pulled her out of the car. He raped her on the ground then forced her back into the car and drove to a partially boarded-up trailer owned by his mother. There he beat Victim repeatedly about the face, head, and back with a tire iron, forced her to smoke crack after trying to make her swallow it, and raped her again.

Finally, at about 6:00 a.m. the following morning, petitioner agreed to let Victim leave with the threat that he would kill her and her children if she told anyone. He dropped her off near her home. Victim walked to her sister's house and from there was taken by ambulance to the hospital where she was treated for facial fractures and severe bruising.

Petitioner admitted having sex with Victim but claimed it was consensual. He testified they agreed to exchange sex for drugs and left the bar together for that purpose. At the trailer, they smoked crack and had sex. When Victim indicated she did not want to have sex with him again, petitioner cut off the drugs. Victim became angry and attacked petitioner with a piece of board. Petitioner defended himself.

The trial judge charged self-defense. Petitioner requested an additional charge that the State must disprove self-defense. The trial judge refused the charge and petitioner appealed.2 The Court of Appeals affirmed with one judge dissenting.

343 S.C. 293
ISSUE
Did the trial judge err in refusing to instruct the jury that the State has the burden of disproving self-defense?

DISCUSSION

Petitioner contends under State v. Wiggins, 330 S.C. 538, 500 S.E.2d 489 (1998), he was entitled to a charge that the State had the burden of disproving self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wiggins addressed whether the defendant was entitled to a directed verdict because the State failed to negate self-defense. We noted that self-defense is no longer an affirmative defense in our State and that "current law requires the State to disprove self-defense, once raised by the defendant, beyond a reasonable doubt." 330 S.C. at 544, 500 S.E.2d at 492.3 The Court of Appeals' majority found Wiggins was not controlling in the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • State v. Cherry, No. 3296.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • February 12, 2001
    ...evidence presented at trial should not be refused." State v. Austin, 299 S.C. 456, 385 S.E.2d 830, 831 (1989); see also State v. Addison, 343 S.C. 290, 540 S.E.2d 449 (2000); State v. 353 S.C. 289 Kimbrell, 294 S.C. 51, 362 S.E.2d 630 (1987). Although the refusal to give a specific charge m......
  • State v. Cherry, No. 3406.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • November 13, 2001
    ...evidence presented at trial should not be refused." State v. Austin, 299 S.C. 456, 385 S.E.2d 830, 831 (1989); see also State v. Addison, 343 S.C. 290, 540 S.E.2d 449 (2000); State v. Kimbrell, 294 S.C. 51, 362 S.E.2d 630 Although the refusal to give a specific charge may not be error "when......
  • State v. Moore, No. 25217.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • December 11, 2000
    ...her sister's apartment complex. The fact that Davis failed to recognize him until the show-up highlights both the inherent unreliability 343 S.C. 290 of the identification and the completely suggestive nature of the show-up procedure. Further, as to the defendant Moore, Davis gave no physic......
  • State v. Bryant, No. 26183.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • July 17, 2006
    ...the burden remains on the State to disprove self-defense. See State v. Burkhart, 350 S.C. 252, 565 S.E.2d 298 (2002); State v. Addison, 343 S.C. 290, 540 S.E.2d 449 (2000); State v. Wiggins, 330 S.C. 538, 500 S.E.2d 489 In this case, Petitioner's defense was that he acted in self-defense, a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • State v. Cherry, No. 3296.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • February 12, 2001
    ...evidence presented at trial should not be refused." State v. Austin, 299 S.C. 456, 385 S.E.2d 830, 831 (1989); see also State v. Addison, 343 S.C. 290, 540 S.E.2d 449 (2000); State v. 353 S.C. 289 Kimbrell, 294 S.C. 51, 362 S.E.2d 630 (1987). Although the refusal to give a specific charge m......
  • State v. Cherry, No. 3406.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • November 13, 2001
    ...evidence presented at trial should not be refused." State v. Austin, 299 S.C. 456, 385 S.E.2d 830, 831 (1989); see also State v. Addison, 343 S.C. 290, 540 S.E.2d 449 (2000); State v. Kimbrell, 294 S.C. 51, 362 S.E.2d 630 Although the refusal to give a specific charge may not be error "when......
  • State v. Moore, No. 25217.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • December 11, 2000
    ...her sister's apartment complex. The fact that Davis failed to recognize him until the show-up highlights both the inherent unreliability 343 S.C. 290 of the identification and the completely suggestive nature of the show-up procedure. Further, as to the defendant Moore, Davis gave no physic......
  • State v. Bryant, No. 26183.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • July 17, 2006
    ...the burden remains on the State to disprove self-defense. See State v. Burkhart, 350 S.C. 252, 565 S.E.2d 298 (2002); State v. Addison, 343 S.C. 290, 540 S.E.2d 449 (2000); State v. Wiggins, 330 S.C. 538, 500 S.E.2d 489 In this case, Petitioner's defense was that he acted in self-defense, a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT