812 S.E.2d 432
S.C. Ct. App.2018Background
- On May 16–17, 2012, Kadeem Chambers was shot and later died; Jujuain Hemingway was shot and survived. Denzel Heyward was accused by witnesses of participating in the attack and using the nickname "Fat."
- Quasantrina Rivers (mother of Heyward’s child) drove Heyward and Dashaun Simmons to locations immediately before the shooting; Rivers testified Heyward obtained a gun and participated in the assault.
- Hemingway initially failed to identify Heyward from a photo array shown on May 18, 2012, but identified him from a second array on May 19, 2012.
- Heyward was tried with Simmons; the jury convicted Heyward of attempted murder, armed robbery, and possession of a weapon during a violent crime; the murder charge resulted in a mistrial.
- At trial the court admitted Hemingway’s photo-lineup identification, testimony that Heyward had physically abused Rivers, and victim-impact materials at sentencing. Heyward appealed these evidentiary and sentencing rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Heyward) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of photo-lineup ID | The lineup was unduly suggestive (same photo in two lineups) and the court failed to apply Neil v. Biggers factors | The identification was reliable under Neil v. Biggers; witness had good opportunity to view perpetrator and identified quickly | Court affirmed admission: lineup found reliable; even if error, admission was harmless (cumulative and vetted at trial) |
| Admission of domestic violence evidence | Testimony that Heyward abused Rivers was inadmissible propensity evidence under Rules 404(b) and 403 | State argued defense opened the door and the evidence was relevant to Rivers' credibility/state of mind | Court affirmed: defense opened the door during cross; objections were insufficiently specific; testimony was cumulative to Rivers’ own statements |
| Sentencing conducted at 1:30 a.m. | Late hour violated due process; sentencing should have been delayed | State sought to proceed due to victim-family hardship; no timely objection on due-process grounds | Issue not preserved for appeal (no contemporaneous due-process objection); affirmed |
| Victim-impact materials unrelated to convictions | Victim-impact testimony focused on Chambers’ death (not a conviction) was improper and defendant lacked notice | State presented photos, video tribute, and letter as victim-impact; no objection below | Issue not preserved (no objection); court affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972) (two-step test for suppressing eyewitness identifications based on suggestive procedures)
- State v. Liverman, 398 S.C. 130 (2012) (applying Neil v. Biggers reliability factors)
- State v. Tutton, 354 S.C. 319 (Ct. App.) (trial court best positioned to assess witness credibility)
- State v. Robinson, 305 S.C. 469 (1991) (party opening the door cannot later complain of admitted evidence)
- State v. Beam, 336 S.C. 45 (Ct. App.) (opponent may explain or rebut evidence introduced by other party)
- State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138 (2003) (issues not raised and ruled on below are not preserved for appellate review)
- State v. New, 338 S.C. 313 (Ct. App.) (general objections insufficient to preserve issues on appeal)