State v. Gray, 408 S.C. 601

Kenneth Mack was beaten in two sequential fights in Gonzales Gardens on Feb. 13, 2010; he died days later from blunt head trauma.
Defendants Henry Gray and Robin Reese were convicted by a jury of murder and first-degree lynching; both received concurrent 30-year sentences.
State pathologist Dr. Bradley Marcus performed the autopsy and identified a skull fracture and massive subdural hemorrhage; he testified the injury was consistent with falling and striking the head on concrete.
Defense pathologists generally agreed blunt force trauma caused death but suggested the fatal injury might have occurred in the first fight and posited a possible "lucid interval."
The State introduced eleven autopsy photographs; three (Exhibits 80, 81, 83) are graphic autopsy images showing exposed skull/brain. Gray objected under Rule 403, SCRE; the trial court admitted the photos after an in camera hearing.
On appeal Gray argued the photos’ prejudicial effect substantially outweighed their probative value; the court affirmed admission and the convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Gray)	Held
Admissibility of autopsy photos under Rule 403	Photos are highly probative: they corroborate pathologist testimony on cause, location, and severity of injury and support malice and timing tied to Gray’s conduct	Graphic photos were unfairly prejudicial and unnecessary because diagrams and testimony already established cause of death; defense pathologists did not dispute cause at trial	Trial court did not abuse discretion — photos had high probative value and only moderate unfair prejudice; admission affirmed
Necessity of photos given diagrams	Photos illustrate anatomical detail and hemorrhage in ways crude diagrams could not, aiding juror comprehension and corroborating expert testimony	Diagrams and expert testimony alone sufficed; photos added little	Photos were necessary to demonstrate specific injury location and severity; probative weight upheld
Prejudicial impact of graphic images	Presentation was technical and educational, reducing emotional appeal; images aided proof of malice and timing	Images risked luring jury to an improper, emotional verdict	Court found danger of unfair prejudice moderate and outweighed by probative value
Reliance on Collins precedent to exclude photos	State distinguished Collins on its facts and probative value here	Gray argued Collins required exclusion due to graphic nature	Collins is fact-specific and not controlling; court found Collins distinguishable and affirmed admission

State v. Dickerson, 395 S.C. 101 (discretionary standard for evidentiary rulings)
State v. Lee, 399 S.C. 521 (wide trial-court discretion on Rule 403 objections)
State v. Dial, 405 S.C. 247 (balancing probative value of autopsy photos against unfair prejudice)
State v. Torres, 390 S.C. 618 (exclude sympathy-arousing photos not necessary to substantiate material facts)
State v. Holder, 382 S.C. 278 (expert testimony can increase probative value of autopsy photos)
State v. Collins, 398 S.C. 197 (autopsy photos reversed where probative value minimal and prejudice extreme)
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (definition of "unfair prejudice" under Rule 403)