State v. Jamison

Full title: The State, Respondent, v. Andra Byron Jamison, Appellant.

Court: THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Feb 1, 2012

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-058 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 1, 2012)

Opinion

2012-UP-058

02-01-2012

The State, Respondent, v. Andra Byron Jamison, Appellant.

Jeremy A. Thompson, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Heard November 16, 2011.

Appeal From Lexington County R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Jeremy A. Thompson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Andra Jamison appeals his conviction for felony driving under the influence resulting in death. We find the State denied Jamison a reasonable opportunity to obtain testing of his own blood sample, and therefore the trial court erred in admitting the results of testing the State performed on its sample of Jamison's blood. See S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-2946 (2006) ("A person who is tested or gives samples for testing may have a qualified person of his choice conduct additional tests at his expense...."); see also State v. Lewis, 266 S.C. 45, 48, 221 S.E.2d 524, 526 (1976) (holding a DUI suspect who refuses to take a breathalyzer test is entitled to a reasonable opportunity to obtain independent testing of his blood). However, we find the error to be harmless and affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Sims, 387 S.C. 557, 566-67, 694 S.E.2d 9, 14-15 (2010) (finding erroneous admission of evidence was harmless, and therefore did not warrant reversal, when guilt was conclusively proven by other evidence such that no other rational conclusion could be reached); State v. Wilson, 296 S.C. 73, 76, 370 S.E.2d 715, 716 (1988) (finding erroneous admission of blood test results was not prejudicial in a DUI trial when other evidence demonstrated defendant's intoxication).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and THOMAS and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.