The South Carolina Supreme Court has reinstated a man’s murder conviction, overturning an appeals court decision that the trial jury should have received instructions on a voluntary manslaughter charge.
Richard Bill Niles Jr.’s was sentenced to 35 years after being convicted of murder, armed robbery and the illegal possession of a firearm.
Niles, 31, was convicted in March 2009 in the 2007 shooting death of James Salter in a Best Buy parking lot in Myrtle Beach. According to the trial documents and testimony, Niles; his fiancée, Mokeia Hammond; and Ervin Moore met Salter in the parking lot to buy marijuana from him.
Hammond and Moore were also charged with the same three felonies, but Moore pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of voluntary manslaughter in exchange for his testimony. He is expected to be released from prison in 2020.
According to Moore’s testimony, he inspected and purchased the drugs from Salter and then heard two shots and saw Niles leap into the back seat of their vehicle behind Hammond. Moore said he then heard the victim fire his weapon in response.
Niles admitted to setting up the meeting but testified that said once he saw Moore and Salter fighting in the vehicle, he realized Moore was attempting to rob Salter.
“While he was shooting in the car…I grabbed my pistol and that’s when I shot two times,” Niles said on the witness stand. “I was just trying to get him to stop shooting. That’s all I was trying to do.”
The judge denied Niles’ request that the jury be instructed on the charge of voluntary manslaughter, and the jury was instructed on the law regarding murder and self-defense. After six hours of deliberation, the jury convicted Niles of murder, as well as the other two charges.
Niles’ defense team appealed the judge’s decision to not include the voluntary manslaughter jury instruction. The Court of Appeals agreed in 2012 and ordered a new trial, finding that “there was evidence of sufficient legal provocation based on Niles’ testimony that he shot at the victim only after the victim began shooting first.”
Writing for the Supreme Court’s majority, Chief Justice Jean Toal, wrote that Niles was not entitled to a new trial, agreeing with the state that “there was no evidence at trial that Niles acted in the sudden heat of passion,” an element of voluntary manslaughter.
“Niles own testimony does not establish that he was overtaken by a sudden heat of passion such that he had an uncontrollable impulse to do violence,” Toal wrote. “The focus of Niles’ testimony at trial was on who was the aggressor – Niles or the victim – apparently to support Niles’s theory of self-defense.
“Because Niles, by his own testimony, lacked the intent to harm the victim, we cannot see how a voluntary manslaughter charge would have been appropriate.”
Justice Costa M. Pleicones dissented, agreeing with the Court of Appeals decision.
“… As the Court of Appeals noted, the unprovoked shooting by Salter amounted to evidence sufficient for a jury to infer there was legal provocation,” Pleicones wrote. “I agree with the Court of Appeals that Niles’ testimony that he immediately returned fire out of fear for himself and his fiancée provided evidence from which a jury could find that Niles was acting pursuant to an uncontrollable impulse to do violence.”
Niles’ fiancée, Hammond, was found not guilty of murder and a weapons charge, but she was convicted of armed robbery and is serving 15 years in prison. She is eligible for release at the end of August 2021, according to the Department of Corrections.
Follow Matthew Stevens on Twitter @SCLWStevens