State v. White, No. 25896.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Citation361 S.C. 407,605 S.E.2d 540
Decision Date15 November 2004
Docket NumberNo. 25896.
PartiesThe STATE, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Nickie WHITE, Respondent/Petitioner.

361 S.C. 407
605 S.E.2d 540

The STATE, Petitioner/Respondent,
v.
Nickie WHITE, Respondent/Petitioner

No. 25896.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Heard October 7, 2004.

Decided November 15, 2004.


361 S.C. 409
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson, Assistant Attorney General W. Rutledge Martin; and Solicitor Warren B. Giese, all of Columbia, for Petitioner-Respondent

Katherine Carruth Link, of West Columbia; and South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, both of Columbia, for Respondent-Petitioner.

Justice BURNETT:

This matter is before the Court on both parties' petitions for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Court of Appeals' decision in State v. White, 353 S.C. 566, 578 S.E.2d 728 (Ct.App.2003). We affirm as modified.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Following a jury trial, Respondent/Petitioner Nickie White (White) was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct

361 S.C. 410
(CSC) and kidnapping. White was sentenced to consecutive prison terms of thirty years for the criminal sexual conduct and ten years for kidnapping. The Court of Appeals affirmed White's kidnapping conviction, but reversed White's first-degree CSC conviction, holding the circuit court erred in refusing to charge assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature (ABHAN) as a lesser-included offense of CSC. The Court of Appeals also concluded the trial court did not err in refusing to charge simple assault as a lesser included offense of CSC and that any error in admitting the testimony of the State's expert on post-traumatic stress disorder and sexual abuse was harmless. Id. at 575-76, 578 S.E.2d at 733

The events giving rise to White's conviction occurred in the early morning hours of August 1, 1998, after White and the victim left a club in Columbia where the victim was employed. On several previous occasions, the victim and White conversed while the victim worked. On the night of July 31, 1998, White was again a customer in the club. White and the victim talked and danced. When the victim needed to go for change during her shift, she asked White to accompany her. While the two were out, they took photographs together, kissed, and held hands.

White and the victim returned to the club and the victim accepted White's invitation to breakfast. Soon thereafter, the victim testified she became tired and frustrated because she had not made much money that night. She therefore declined White's breakfast invitation. Despite her fatigue and frustration, the victim agreed to drive White to his grandmother's house where he resided because he had no ride home. When they arrived, White went inside to check on his grandmother and then returned to the car where the victim was waiting. At this point, White and the victim offered very different accounts of the events that followed.

The victim testified White asked her to take him to the store to buy a soda. The victim further testified that White pulled a knife on her, held it to her throat, and threatened to kill her if she did not do as he said. White then directed the victim to Earlewood Park where he ordered her to park the car. When the victim attempted to escape, White ran her

361 S.C. 411
down and dragged her into the woods. White punched the victim, raped her, and took one of her rings. White began choking the victim, and a struggle ensued for the knife. The victim testified she retrieved the knife and began swinging it back and forth in White's direction, injuring White. White then grabbed the victim and began choking her again. The victim threw the knife into the woods and grabbed White's genitals. The two continued to struggle and White suddenly walked off. Shortly after the attack, the victim encountered two men in the park who took her to the hospital

White's account differed. According to White, after going to the store for a soda, the victim asked him to go to Earlewood Park to watch the sunrise. White testified he brought along a butcher knife to protect the two because the area has a history of drug-related violence. Once White and the victim arrived at the park, White stated the victim began "coming on" to him. The victim began kissing him and the two engaged in what White contended was consensual sex. White testified he ended the sexual encounter because he began thinking of his girlfriend. According to White, the victim became so angry that she grabbed White's knife and stabbed him. In self-defense, he hit her in the eye.

White testified he initially lied to law enforcement officers when he said he had been robbed by five males dressed in camouflage because he was scared and in shock.

ISSUES

I. Did the Court of Appeals err in concluding White was entitled to an ABHAN charge?
II. Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the trial court's refusal to charge the jury on simple assault and battery as a lesser-included offense of first-degree CSC?
III. Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the trial court's admission of expert testimony on post-traumatic stress disorder and sexual abuse?

I.

The State argues the Court of Appeals erred in holding White was entitled to a charge on ABHAN as a lesser included offense of first-degree CSC. We disagree.

361 S.C. 412
ABHAN is a lesser included offense of first degree CSC. State v. Primus, 349 S.C. 576, 581, 564 S.E.2d 103, 106 (2002). The law to be charged is determined by the evidence presented at trial. State v. Todd, 290 S.C. 212, 349 S.E.2d 339 (1986)....

To continue reading

Request your trial
65 practice notes
  • State v. Rice, No. 4300.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 5 Octubre 2007
    ...allow pornographic materials or links on the website, it is patent that they opened the door to this line of inquiry."); State v. White, 361 S.C. 407, 415, 605 S.E.2d 540, 544 (2004) (ruling expert could testify that she believed the victim in this case because defendant opened the door by ......
  • Mangal v. Warden, Perry Corr. Inst., Civil Action No. 6:18-106-RBH-KFM
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • 18 Diciembre 2019
    ...Dawkins "and its progeny" establish "the proper boundaries of expert testimony regarding . . . sexual abuse"), aff'd as modified, 605 S.E.2d 540 (S.C. 2004); State v. Dempsey, 532 S.E.2d 306, 309 (S.C. Ct. App. 2000) ("[N]o psychotherapist may render an opinion on whether a witness is credi......
  • State v. Lee-Grigg, No. 4237.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 16 Abril 2007
    ...A trial court commits reversible error if it fails to give a requested charge on an issue raised by the evidence. State v. White, 361 S.C. 407, 412, 605 S.E.2d 540, 542 (2004); State v. Burriss, 334 S.C. 256, 262, 513 S.E.2d 104, 108 (1999); Harrison, 343 S.C. at 172, 539 S.E.2d at 74. On r......
  • State v. Santiago, No. 4127.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 19 Junio 2006
    ...giving a self-defense charge is critical in this case. The evidence presented at trial determines the law to be charged. State v. White, 361 S.C. 407, 412, 605 S.E.2d 540, 542 (2004); State v. Light, 363 S.C. 325, 330, 610 S.E.2d 504, 506 (Ct.App.2005). An appellate court will not reverse t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
65 cases
  • State v. Rice, No. 4300.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 5 Octubre 2007
    ...allow pornographic materials or links on the website, it is patent that they opened the door to this line of inquiry."); State v. White, 361 S.C. 407, 415, 605 S.E.2d 540, 544 (2004) (ruling expert could testify that she believed the victim in this case because defendant opened the door by ......
  • Mangal v. Warden, Perry Corr. Inst., Civil Action No. 6:18-106-RBH-KFM
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • 18 Diciembre 2019
    ...Dawkins "and its progeny" establish "the proper boundaries of expert testimony regarding . . . sexual abuse"), aff'd as modified, 605 S.E.2d 540 (S.C. 2004); State v. Dempsey, 532 S.E.2d 306, 309 (S.C. Ct. App. 2000) ("[N]o psychotherapist may render an opinion on whether a witness is credi......
  • State v. Lee-Grigg, No. 4237.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 16 Abril 2007
    ...A trial court commits reversible error if it fails to give a requested charge on an issue raised by the evidence. State v. White, 361 S.C. 407, 412, 605 S.E.2d 540, 542 (2004); State v. Burriss, 334 S.C. 256, 262, 513 S.E.2d 104, 108 (1999); Harrison, 343 S.C. at 172, 539 S.E.2d at 74. On r......
  • State v. Santiago, No. 4127.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 19 Junio 2006
    ...giving a self-defense charge is critical in this case. The evidence presented at trial determines the law to be charged. State v. White, 361 S.C. 407, 412, 605 S.E.2d 540, 542 (2004); State v. Light, 363 S.C. 325, 330, 610 S.E.2d 504, 506 (Ct.App.2005). An appellate court will not reverse t......
  • 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