Opinion ID: 1383657
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Admission of Appellant's Testimony from Prior Trial

Text: Appellant contends the trial court erred in admitting appellant's testimony from his prior Calhoun County trial. We disagree. Appellant objected on the ground that the testimony was inadmissible hearsay. We disagree. Under Rule 801(d)(2), SCRE, an admission by a party-opponent is not hearsay if the statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party's own statement in either an individual or a representative capacity ... Accordingly, appellant's testimony was not hearsay pursuant to Rule 801(d)(2) and the trial court did not err in admitting it. Appellant also argues the admission of this testimony violated S.C.Code § 19-11-50 (Supp.1997). We disagree. This section provides: The testimony of a defendant in a criminal case shall not be afterwards used against the defendant in any other criminal case, except upon an indictment for perjury founded on that testimony. (emphasis added). Here, the testimony was offered in a resentencing proceeding in the same criminal case. Furthermore, the testimony was merely cumulative to appellant's statements which had already been admitted in the guilt phase. [5] State v. Blackburn, 271 S.C. 324, 247 S.E.2d 334 (1978). Accordingly, the trial judge did not err in admitting this evidence.