State v. White
Citation | 246 S.C. 502,144 S.E.2d 481 |
Decision Date | 13 October 1965 |
Docket Number | No. 18408,18408 |
Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. David WHITE, Appellant. |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
Matthew J. Perry, Columbia, John H. Wrighten, Charleston, Ernest A. Finney, Jr., Sumter, for appellant.
Solicitor, R. Kirk McLeod, Sumter, for respondent.
This is the second appeal by the defendant from a death sentence for rape. The first was reversed and a new trial ordered because of error in the charge. State v. White, 243 S.C. 238, 133 S.E.2d 320. Upon a retrial the defendant was again convicted and the death sentence imposed.
While the defendant has appealed upon several grounds. The only question which we need consider is whether the lower court erred in refusing to sustain the objection of the defendant to the following portion of the argument made by the Solicitor to the jury:
* * *
* * *
Counsel for the defendant made timely objection to the foregoing argument upon the ground that such statements constituted an effort to have the jury identify the facts of this case with their mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters, and was therefore highly prejudicial to the defendant. The objection was overruled, as was a motion by the defendant for a mistrial upon the same grounds. The lower court ruled that the foregoing argument was proper and therefore no attempt to take corrective action was made.
It has long been the rule in this State that a wide discretion is allowed the presiding judge in dealing with the range and propriety of argument of counsel, and ordinarily his rulings on such matters will not be disturbed.
However, an improper argument of counsel representing the successful party, which materially prejudices the right of the losing party to obtain a fair and impartial trial, is ground for a new trial where the effect of the improper argument was not sufficiently counteracted by the trial court, and when timely objection was interposed so as to preserve the right to relief. State v. Gilstrap, 205 S.C. 412, 32 S.E.2d 163. As stated in the cited case: 'The rule followed in this State, and we think in most jurisdictions, is that if upon the whole case, it appears to the Court that the defendant was prejudiced by the language used, as the result of which he did not have a fair and impartial trial, it would be the duty of the Court to reverse the case and remand it for a new trial.'
A somewhat similar but less inflammatory argument was characterized as follows in the Gilstrap case:
The State contends however that, assuming the argument to be improper, it could not have prejudiced the defendant because of the overwhelming proof of guilt, relying upon the decision in State v....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Quillien v. Leeke, Civ. A. No. 69-475.
...of his plea by reason of such confession. 16 State v. Worthy (1962) 239 S.C. 449, 467-469, 123 S.E.2d 835; State v. White (1965) 246 S.C. 502, 507, 144 S.E.2d 481; In re Anderson (1868) 69 Cal.2d 613, 73 Cal.Rptr. 21, 447 P.2d 117, 123-128; Cf. Winston v. United States, 172 U.S. 303, 313, 1......
-
State v. Hamilton
...judge is allowed wide discretion in dealing with the range and propriety of argument of the Solicitor to the jury. State v. White, 246 S.C. 502, 144 S.E.2d 481 (1965); State v. New, 338 S.C. 313, 526 S.E.2d 237 (Ct.App. 1999). The defendant bears the burden of proving the improper argument ......
-
Simmons v. State
...would be for murder or involuntary manslaughter, upon which depended the punishment to be received by appellant. Cf. State v. White, 246 S.C. 502, 144 S.E.2d 481 (1965). The inference was in a form not subject to cross-examination, in violation of the fundamental right of an accused in a cr......
-
State v. Copeland
...tailored so as not to appeal to the personal bias of the juror nor be calculated to arouse his passion or prejudice. State v. White, 246 S.C. 502, 144 S.E.2d 481 (1965). The trial judge is vested with a broad discretion in dealing with the propriety of the argument of the solicitor to the j......