South Carolina Criminal Defense Blog

In State v. Smith, decided March 24, the S.C. Court of Appeals affirmed Smith's conviction for accessory to murder and armed robbery over her claim that the trial court should have granted her requests for a continuance and severance.

Continuance - the Court held that 10 days notice of trial is sufficient when the case has been on the docket for a year, and it does not matter that defense counsel was informed a week before trial that a new charge, accessory before the fact to burglary, had been added.

Smith had also requested a continuance on grounds that two witnesses were unavailable for trial - but Smith's counsel did not comply with Rule 7(b):

No motion for continuance of trial shall be granted on account of the absence of a witness without the oath of the party, his counsel, or agent to the following effect: the testimony of the witness is material to the support of the action or defense of the party moving; the motion is not intended for delay, but is made solely because he cannot go safely to trial without such testimony; and has made use of due diligence to procure the testimony of the witness or of such other circumstances as will satisfy the court that his motion is not intended for delay.

Severance: although the opinion is not clear on what the record below showed, the Court holds that the trial court did not err in finding that Smith would be able to adequately cross-examine a state's witness on his testimony without addressing the character and criminal history of Grant, Hartwell, and Hollins.

Lastly, the Court re-affirms that, when tried jointly, a defendant loses last closing argument if any co-defendant introduces evidence at trial.