Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.
The summary following each opinion is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what a particular opinion decides. The summary is not necessarily a full description of the issues discussed in an opinion.
4-7-2021 - Opinions
Guadalupe Guzman Morales appealed his convictions for assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct (CSC) with a minor, second degree; CSC with a minor, second degree; and CSC with a minor, first degree. On remand from the supreme court and in light of State v. Perry, 430 S.C. 24, 27, 842 S.E.2d 654, 656 (2020), we reverse and remand.
Kenneth L. Barr, Employee, appeals the decision of the Appellate Panel of the Workers' Compensation Commission denying his claim for medical and compensation benefits. Employee asserts injury as a result of exposure to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the paints he used while working as a painter for the Darlington County School District. We affirm the decision of the Commission.
4-21-2021 - Opinions
Following being injured in an accident while working for Phillips Electronics, Lamar Clark filed for worker's compensation, asserting he was entitled to total and permanent disability benefits. After a hearing, the Single Commissioner found Clark was entitled to such benefits. Phillips appealed to the Appellate Panel, and it reversed, finding Clark unentitled to total and permanent disability benefits. Clark now appeals, claiming the Panel's order is not supported by substantial evidence, and several of its factual findings are clearly erroneous. We agree with Clark and reverse and remand.
John Ernest Perry Jr. appeals his conviction of attempted murder. He maintains because he told the police his gun "went off" accidentally as he attempted to dispose of the gun during a police chase, the trial court erred in charging the jury "when the intent to do an act that violates the law exists, motive becomes immaterial," because attempted murder was a specific intent crime and this was essentially a general intent instruction. We reverse and remand.
Petitioner challenges his convictions for three counts of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the first degree. He argues the trial court erred in granting the State's request for the minor Victim to testify outside of Petitioner's presence. We affirm, as the circuit court's decision was detailed, well-reasoned, and plainly not an abuse of discretion.