Court Opinion

ID: 9581335
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:13:54.163953+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:36:52.347954
License: Public Domain

Ness, Chief Justice
(concurring):
I concur in the majority opinion, but I emphasize the limited holding of this opinion.
The majority opinion does not hold a defendant may be convicted of armed robbery under S. C. Code Ann. § 16-11-330 (1976) when the evidence conclusively establishes *273the weapon used during the robbery was a simulated gun.1 Rather, the opinion merely holds when there is a factual dispute as to whether the weapon used was real or simulated, the factual issue is for the jury’s determination. See, State v. Mathis, 287 S. C. 586, 340 S. E. (2d) 538 (1986) [a motion for directed verdict, trial judge is concerned with existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its weight.]. By finding appellant guilty of armed robbery, the jury in this case necessarily determined the weapon used by appellant during the robbery was real.

 This would be a novel issue in this state. Other jurisdictions are split on the issue. Annot. 81 A. L. R. (3d) 1006 § 11.