been conclusively proven by competent evidence such that no other rational conclusion can be reached, [an appellate] court should not set aside a conviction because of errors not affecting the results.” State v. Kirton, 381 S.C. 7, 25, 671 S.E.2d 107,115-16 (Ct.App.2008) (citation omitted). The State presented overwhelming evidence of Wiley’s guilt. Robertson testified Wiley admitted to possessing the cocaine after he was advised of his Miranda rights. Furthermore, Wiley admitted his guilt in open court. Wiley stated, “I guess I want to apologize to the Court for getting myself in this trouble. I should have known better than what I was doing. I had numerous opportunities to stop. I just want to apologize to the Court.” See State v. Sroka, 267 S.C. 664, 665, 230 S.E.2d 816, 817 (1976) (<HOLDING>). Thus, even if we assume the State’s comment
holding that discussion among jurors of their agreement to the defendants guilt during trial and before deliberation was not such misconduct as can be shown by the affidavit of a juror holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt holding appellants guilt was conclusively shown by the record and any doubt about correctness of guilt was eliminated by the admission of appellant in open court after conviction and during the presentence inquiry by the trial judge that the appellant had participated in the robbery holding that where appellant acknowledged timely receiving notice by regular mail appellant appeared and fully participated at the trial and appellant made no claim that he was harmed in any way appellee had fulfilled the primary purposes of texrcivp 21a holding that prejudice was not shown where there was overwhelming evidence of guilt