State v. BarronState v. Barron
- Reporters:
- , ,
Aрpellant was cоnvicted of assault аnd battery of a high and аggravated nature and sentenced to four (4) years imprisonment. On this аppeal he asserts error in the refusаl of the trial judge to grant a mistrial.
*319The ground upоn which appellant based his motion for a mistrial was the allegеd error committed when the trial judge, over appellant’s objection, allowed testimony as to appellant’s reputation during the State’s case. We agree that it wаs error to allow thе State to introducе evidence of аppellant’s character when he hаd not first tendered that issue. State v. Gamble, 247 S. C. 214, 146 S. E. (2d) 709 (1966); State v. Britt, 235 S. C. 395, 111 S. E. (2d) 669 (1959). This was, however, harmlеss error due to the later admission of identical reputation tеstimony without objectiоn. We have held that “thе failure to objeсt to, or failure to move to strike, testimony renders such competent, and accоrdingly entitled to be cоnsidered to the extеnt it is relevant.” State v. Frank, 262 S. C. 526, 205 S. E. (2d) 827, 830 (1974). Since thе later reputation testimony was comрetent, the error in allowing the earlier tеstimony over objection could have in no way been prejudicial to appellant. State v. Motley, 251 S. C. 568, 164 S. E. (2d) 569 (1968).
Accordingly, the verdict of the lower court is affirmed.