Court Opinion

ID: 9569062
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:10:16.940736+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:26.708143
License: Public Domain

Ness, Justice
(dissenting) :
I dissent. The alleged error, if any, in the trial judge’s charge was cured by his statement that the disposition and handling of appellant should not enter into the jury’s deliberations.
Apart from this curative instruction, the error was harmless. It is well settled that where
*211. . the only rational conclusion warranted by the evidence is that the accused is guilty, the judgment should not be set aside because of unsubstantial errors not affecting the result.” State v. Robinson, 238 S. C. 140, 151, 119 S. E. (2d) 671, 677 (1961).
The evidence against appellant was overwhelming. It is uncontroverted that he committed a vicious murder in the presence of an eye-witness. I have no difficulty in concluding beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged error did not influence the verdict. See Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638, 350 A. (2d) 665 (1976).
I would affirm.
Littlejohn, J., concurs.