Opinion ID: 1343002
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Admission of video, pictures, and visual aids

Text: Kelley next argues the trial judge erred in allowing into evidence photographs depicting the bloodstains on the victim and the surrounding area, a video that panned the crime scene, and charts the pathologist used in describing numerous wounds to the victim's body. We disagree. It is well settled that evidence should be excluded when its probative value is outweighed by its prejudicial effect. State v. Alexander, 303 S.C. 377, 401 S.E.2d 146 (1991). A trial judge has considerable latitude in ruling on the admissibility of evidence and his rulings will not be disturbed absent a showing of probable prejudice. State v. Kornahrens, 290 S.C. 281, 350 S.E.2d 180 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 940, 107 S.Ct. 1592, 94 L.Ed.2d 781 (1987). The determination of the relevancy and materiality of a photograph is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge. State v. Todd, 290 S.C. 212, 349 S.E.2d 339 (1986). The pathologist's charts were handdrawn outlines of the victim's face and body showing numerous wounds in either blue ink or red ink. The pathologist testified that the cause of death was a closed head injury due to massive beating with additional massive beating as a contributing factor. The charts corroborated the pathologist's testimony. See Todd, supra (no abuse of discretion if the offered photograph serves to corroborate testimony). The photographs and video show the crime scene. Specifically, two photographs are of the victim's nude body lying on the living room floor with her face and body visibly swollen from the beating. Additionally, the photographs show blood smeared on the walls and floor. The video shows the entire crime scene. These photographs and video were relevant to establish the crime scene. State v. Campbell, 259 S.C. 339, 191 S.E.2d 770 (1972). Additionally, Kelley's main defense was that he was drunk at the time of the killing and, therefore, should only be convicted of voluntary manslaughter. These charts, photographs, and video also were relevant to establish malice. Kelley argues these items were unfairly prejudicial and, therefore, should have been excluded. To constitute unfair prejudice, the photographs must create a tendency to suggest a decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one. Alexander at 377, 401 S.E.2d at 149. The charts, photographs, and video here depicted the excess nature of the killing. The relevance of the these items and their probative value on the issue of malice was great enough to negate the risk of the jury's basing its decision on an improper passion. See State v. Franklin, ___ S.C. ___, 456 S.E.2d 357 (1995). We affirm.