State v. King, 422 S.C. 47

810 S.E.2d 18 (2017) · Supreme Court of South Carolina · October 25, 2017

Summary

The South Carolina Supreme Court reviews Raheem D. King's convictions for attempted murder, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a violent crime. The court agrees that attempted murder under South Carolina Code section 16-3-29 requires a specific intent to kill and that the trial court erred by instructing the jury otherwise. The court addresses additional evidentiary and jury-instruction issues and affirms the judgment as modified.

Holdings

  1. Attempted murder as codified in South Carolina Code section 16-3-29 requires the State to prove a specific intent to kill; the trial court therefore erred by instructing the jury that specific intent to kill was not an element.
  2. The officer's testimony that she learned from neighborhood witnesses that approximately three or four shots had been fired was inadmissible hearsay because it was based exclusively on out-of-court statements and was offered to prove the truth of the asserted fact.
  3. The trial court abused its discretion by admitting the entire fifteen-minute recording without listening to it or reviewing a transcript and without adequately weighing its probative value against the danger of unfair prejudice.
  4. The erroneous attempted-murder instruction and admission of the officer's hearsay testimony were not harmless as to the attempted-murder conviction, while admission of the telephone recording was harmless as to the armed-robbery and firearm convictions. The errors therefore did not require reversal of those latter convictions.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether attempted murder under South Carolina Code section 16-3-29 requires a specific intent to kill.
  2. Whether the investigating officer's testimony about information learned during a neighborhood canvass was inadmissible hearsay.
  3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the complete recording of King's detention-center telephone call.
  4. Whether the errors required reversal of all of King's convictions or only the attempted-murder conviction.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (16)

  • State v. King, 412 S.C. 403, 772 S.E.2d 189 (Ct. App. 2015)(followed and modified)
  • State v. Laney, 367 S.C. 639, 627 S.E.2d 726 (2006)(followed)
  • State v. Black, 400 S.C. 10, 732 S.E.2d 880 (2012)(followed)
  • State v. Sutton, 340 S.C. 393, 532 S.E.2d 283 (2000)(followed in part)
  • State v. Foust, 325 S.C. 12, 479 S.E.2d 50 (1996)(distinguished)
  • State v. Brockmeyer, 406 S.C. 324, 751 S.E.2d 645 (2013)(followed)
  • State v. Kromah, 401 S.C. 340, 737 S.E.2d 490 (2013)(distinguished)
  • State v. Weaver, 361 S.C. 73, 602 S.E.2d 786 (Ct. App. 2004), aff'd as modified, 374 S.C. 313, 649 S.E.2d 479 (2007)(distinguished)
  • State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 631 S.E.2d 262 (2006)(followed)
  • State v. Cheeseboro, 346 S.C. 526, 552 S.E.2d 300 (2001)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 16.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from South Carolina Supreme Court