TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................... 1
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES................................................................................................................................ 2
ARGUMENT....................................................................................................................................................... 3
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
State v. Burriss, 334 S.C. 256, 513 S.E.2d 104 (1999)................................................................................ 3
State v. Goodson, 312 S.C. 278, 440 S.E.2d 370 (1994)............................................................................ 3
ARGUMENT
Mere unlawful possession of a firearm does not preclude involuntary manslaughter or the defense of accident.
In its brief, the State essentially argues that Wharton was not entitled to jury instructions on involuntary manslaughter or accident simply because he was unlawfully armed at the time of the homicide. Moreover, the State contends, an armed defendant is entitled to those charges only when there is some evidence “he was acting in self-defense when the gun was fired.” Respondent’s Brief, pp. 8 and 10. The Court rejected this argument in State v. Goodson, 312 S.C. 278, 440 S.E.2d 370 (1994). The State still must show that the unlawful possession of a firearm was the proximate cause of the killing. State v. Burriss, 334 S.C. 256, 513 S.E.2d 104 (1999).
Respectfully submitted, Joseph
L. Savitz, III ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT/PETITIONER |
This 8th day of February, 2008.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
IN THE SUPREME COURT
Appeal from Greenville County
C. Victor Pyle, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
THE STATE,
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
V.
DANNY ORLANDO WHARTON,
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER
REPLY
BRIEF OF RESPONDENT
ON BEHALF OF
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER
Joseph L. Savitz, III South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT/PETITIONER |