State v. Smith, 22000
| Decision Date | 03 November 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 22000,22000 |
| Citation | 308 S.E.2d 794,279 S.C. 440 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. David G. SMITH, Appellant. |
Appellate Defender John L. Sweeny and Asst. Appellate Defender Elizabeth C. Fullwood, Columbia, for appellant.
Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Retired Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod and Asst. Atty. Gen. Carolyn M. Adams, Columbia, and Sol. William B. Traxler, Jr., and Asst. Sol. Russell D. Ghent, Greenville, for respondent.
Appeal is taken from conviction on a charge of murder resulting in a sentence of life imprisonment. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
Appellant raises two issues upon this appeal. The first question merits summary disposition. Error is claimed by reason of the trial judge's charge to the jury concerning the implication of malice from use of a deadly weapon. No objection to the jury instruction was raised at trial. The question therefore is not available for our review. Section 17-23-100, Code of Laws, 1976.
A serious question is presented, however, by the admission of certain "reply" testimony for the State. In this case, appellant was charged with the stabbing murder of his girlfriend. At trial the defendant took the witness stand and testified, among other things, to his defense of alibi and his love for the victim. While defendant admitted on direct examination to one federal conviction for mail fraud, he at no point placed his general character in issue.
On cross-examination, appellant was questioned about his relationships with other women during the three years of his professed devotion to the victim. Appellant's responses were distinctly evasive, especially as they pertained to one Pat Dickson. With the testimony in this posture, the defense rested. The State called Pat Dickson in reply to testify that she had on many occasions been sexually intimate with the defendant at the very time he claimed to love the victim. At this point the reply testimony was proper and admissible as it bore upon the defendant's credibility.
Continuing with the examination of Mrs. Dickson, the State brought to light an incident occurring one month before the victim's murder. According to the witness, appellant came to her home late one night in a state of intoxication and with violence committed a sexual battery upon her. At the time of this trial, the incident had not been reported by the witness and obviously was not the subject of any arrest, indictment or, to say...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Diddlemeyer
...bad acts have not resulted in an arrest, indictment or conviction, evidence of those crimes is inadmissible. See, State v. Smith, 279 S.C. 440, 308 S.E.2d 794 (1983). Evidence of prior criminal acts which are independent and unconnected to the crime for which an accused is on trial is inadm......
-
State v. Peake
...or conviction, evidence of such crimes is inadmissible. State v. Diddlemeyer, 296 S.C. 235, 371 S.E.2d 793 (1988); State v. Smith, 279 S.C. 440, 308 S.E.2d 794 (1983). Evidence of prior criminal acts which are independent and unconnected to the crime for which an accused is on trial is inad......
-
State v. Stone
...waiver of his right to complain about the charge on appeal. Singletary v. State, 281 S.C. 444, 316 S.E.2d 369 (1984); State v. Smith, 279 S.C. 440, 308 S.E.2d 794 (1983); State v. Humphery, 276 S.C. 42, 274 S.E.2d 918 In our opinion, the appellant has waived any right to challenge the omiss......
-
State v. Gore, 22167
...guilty plea, indictment, or arrest of the appellant, this Court has limited the State's use of the evidence. State v. Smith, 279 S.C. 440, 308 S.E.2d 794 (1983). (Appellant's lover improperly related instance of the appellant's unconvicted sexual battery upon her in his trial for murder of ......