Facts
- Andrew Troutman was indicted in April 2014 for the malice murder of Earl Clemons, stemming from an incident that occurred on January 25, 2014 [lines="18-19"].
- The deterioration of Troutman and Clemons' friendship was marked by Troutman making threats against Clemons after a fake Facebook profile featuring embarrassing photos of him was created [lines="56-62"].
- A security guard discovered Clemons’s dead body with multiple stab wounds on January 25, 2014, and medical examination confirmed the nature of the fatal wounds [lines="70-74"].
- During police interviews, Troutman admitted to planning to meet Clemons but later expressed being “kind of happy” about Clemons's death, showing apparent hostility [lines="85-86"].
- The jury heard recorded conversations where Troutman stated he had killed Clemons and described the incident, referring to the disposal of the knife used in the stabbing [lines="150-155"].
Issues
- Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support Troutman’s conviction for malice murder under constitutional standards [lines="166-167"].
- Whether any prosecutorial misconduct occurred during the trial that would affect the verdict [lines="215-216"].
- Whether Troutman received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, impacting the trial's outcome [lines="302-303"].
Holdings
- The Court found that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient to support Troutman’s conviction for malice murder, as the jury could reasonably determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt [lines="186-187"].
- The claims of prosecutorial misconduct were either unpreserved for review or resolved in Troutman’s favor during trial, thus presenting no issues for appellate review [lines="220-221"].
- Troutman did not demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel, as he failed to prove either deficient performance or that the performance prejudiced the outcome of the trial [lines="333-334"].
OPINION
*1 THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals The State, Respondent,
v.
Latoya Denise Rivers, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2023-001235 Appeal From Richland County Michael G. Nettles, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2024-UP-304 Submitted August 28, 2024 – Filed September 4, 2024 APPEAL DISMISSED Appellate Defender Jessica M. Saxon, of Columbia, and Latoya Denise Rivers, pro se, both for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Dismissed after consideration of Appellant's pro se brief and review pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's motion to be relieved is granted.
APPEAL DISMISSED. [1]
KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and VINSON, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR .