Opinion ID: 2502176
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: analysis

Text: Barber argues the evidence presented at trial did not support a jury charge on accomplice liability as to the murder charge. We disagree. In State v. Funchess, 267 S.C. 427, 229 S.E.2d 331 (1976), and other cases, this Court has held that a lesser-included offense may not be charged merely on the theory the jury may believe some of the evidence and disbelieve other evidence. Barber relies upon this reasoning to support his argument that similar speculation is insufficient to warrant a jury charge on an alternate theory of liability. Barber's proposition is correct. Like a lesser-included offense, an alternate theory of liability may only be charged when the evidence is equivocal on some integral fact and the jury has been presented with evidence upon which it could rely to find the existence or nonexistence of that fact. We find the sum of the evidence presented at trial, both by the State and defense, was equivocal as to who was the shooter. Thus, the charge on accomplice liability was warranted. Under the `hand of one is the hand of all' theory, one who joins with another to accomplish an illegal purpose is liable criminally for everything done by his confederate incidental to the execution of the common design and purpose. Mattison, 388 S.C. at 479, 697 S.E.2d at 584. To support an accomplice liability charge in this case, the question is whether there is any evidence that another co-conspirator was the shooter and Barber was acting with him when the robbery took place. See State v. Dickman, 341 S.C. 293, 295-96, 534 S.E.2d 268, 269 (2000). We find evidence to support the conclusion that Barber was acting with the other men during the robbery. Because all of the men clothed themselves all in black and wrapped shirts around their heads so only their eyes were visible, the witnesses could only describe and differentiate the men based on physical build, height, and the weapon carried. Kimbrell, Kiser, and Walker, however, all testified to substantially the same version of the planning and execution of the robberythat Barber was involved and was the shooter. The evidence presented at trial could also support a finding that one of the other robbers was the shooter. The State presented evidence that Kiser was the shortest of the three men and carried the rifle, Barber was of middle height and carried a semi-automatic handgun, and Walker was the tallest and carried no weapon. However, defense counsel elicited testimony that all three robbers were armedone with a rifle and two with .380 handguns, the type weapon forensic experts testified fired all the shots in Heintz's home that evening. Defense counsel's cross of Coleman Robinson, the witness who had been sleeping on the couch when the robbery began, indicates all three men were armed: Q: [quoting from Mr. Robinson's statement to the police days after the incident] After the door was open, first they pushed it wide and hit the wall. As soon as that happened, that person turned the lights on. A: Yes. Q: Without having to look for the switch. I just laid on the couch until this same person walked up to me and I noticed he was holding a gun in his left hand. A: Yes. Q: And that's the truth? A: Yes. . . . Q: All right. And then later on you talk about the second guy. The second guy was a little shorter and looked younger. He was carrying a rifle. A: Yes, sir . . . . Q: Then you say the third guy was taller, about six feet, 160. He had a bunched up T-shirt around his head, too. He looked to be in his early twenties. He was carrying a pistol also. A: Yes. Kyle Robinson, Coleman's brother who was asleep in a bedroom when the robbery began, also testified that the tallest of the three, which would be Walker, was armed: A: [On direct examination] Well, as I went to the [bedroom] door to see what was going on, my door was like halfway shut, so I looked through the little space and that's when I saw the guy go back there to Alan's room and he had a black pistol in his hand. [2] . . . A: And then by that time I kind of opened the door and I looked and I saw the gun at Coleman's head, my brother, and I saw him give his wallet up.... . . . Q: Were you able to tell anything about the other two as far as size goes? A: I remember seeing the guy that went in the back. He seemed to be the biggest of all of them. Q: Okay. When you say big A: You know, tall. Just the tallest of all of them.... . . . Q: [On cross-examination] And you saw a black guy holding a small semi-automatic handgun to [your] brother's head; is that right? A: Right. Q: He was a black guy about six feet tall, weighing 150 to 160; is that right? A: That's what I said, but I was actually kind of wrong about that. Q: So when you made this statement on the 15th, the day after it happened, you said he was six feet tall? A: That's what he appeared to be, but the other guy was bigger. . . . Q: There was a shorter black guy pointing a rifle at [you]? A: Yeah. Q: And a third black guy went to the other bedroom and pulled Alan out. He was about six feet tall and weighed 180 pounds, and today you said he had a gun also? A: Yes. Further, defense counsel outright argued that Walker was armed with a .380, the type of gun that fired the shots at Heintz's house, suggesting that Walker was the shooter. Thus, the testimony offered at trial indicating there may have been two robbers armed with handguns is sufficient to warrant the jury charge.