THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court

The State, Petitioner,

v.

Karl Lane, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2013-002606

ON WRI T OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

Appeal from Pickens County G. Edward Welmaker, Ci rcuit Court Judge

Opinion No. 27464 Submitted August 20, 2014 – Fi led November 12, 2014

REVERSED

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson and Assistant Attorney General J. Benjamin Aplin , both of Columbia, for

Petitioner.

Appellate Defender Carmen V. Ganjehsani, of Columbia, for Respondent.PER CURIAM: The State seeks a writ of certiorari to review the court of appeals'

decision in State v. Lane , 406 S.C. 118, 749 S.E.2d 165 (Ct. App. 2013). We grant the petition, dispense with further briefing , reverse the court of appeals' decision, and reinstate Respondent's conviction and sentence.

Respondent was convicted of first-degree burglary and sentenced to 215 months' imprisonment in connection with the theft of several firearms from the victim's home. The court of appeals re versed the trial court's refu sal to direct a verdict of acquittal for Respondent, finding that the State did not present substantial circumstantial evidence to prove that Res pondent committed the burglary. We disagree, for in viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, which we are constrained to do, the State presen ted substantial circumstantial evidence of Respondent's guilt.

On the afternoon of the burglary, the vi ctim's neighbor observed a red Mitsubishi Gallant with gray primer paint on the front fender and a paper license plate parked in the victim's driveway. The neighbor obs erved two people in the vehicle, one of

whom walked back and forth from the vehicl e to the victim's front door. Later that evening, following the burglary, the vic tim found a piece of paper with a unique username and password printed upon it lyi ng next to his driveway. Officers determined that the piece of paper was issued to Respondent by the local unemployment office. Suspecting Respondent 's involvement in the burglary, an investigator went to interview Respondent at his girlfriend's parents' home. When the investigator arrived, he observed a red Mitsubishi Gallant with gray primer paint on the front fender and a paper license plate in the driveway. Respondent was initially evasive, asking his girlfriend's mother to lie to the investigator and

state that he was not home. Eventua lly, however, Respondent spoke with the investigator and acknowledged driving the Mitsubishi Gallant on the day of the burglary and receiving the piece of pa per from the unemployment agency.

We find that the aforementioned evidence was sufficient to withstand Respondent's

motion for a directed verdict. See State v. Weston , 367 S.C. 279, 292–93, 625 S.E.2d 641, 648 (2006) ("If th ere is any direct eviden ce or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably tending to prove the guilt of the accused, the Court must find the case was properly submitt ed to the jury." (citations omitted)).Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals and reinstate Respondent's conviction and sentence.

REVERSED.

TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY , KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ.,

concur.