"Little K" throughout the record. 3 .Martin testified she only stayed at the home during the daytime. 4 . Dr. Ross testified that defensive wounds are wounds incurred by the victim while trying to defend from an attacker. These injuries are usually in the form of bruises or lacerations on the outside of the arms or hands. 5 . State v. Patterson, 367 S.C. 219, 231, 625 S.E.2d 239, 245 (Ct.App.2006). 6 . Id. at 232, 625 S.E.2d at 245 (Ct.App.2006). 7 . State v. Small, 307 S.C. 92, 94, 413 S.E.2d 870, 871 (Ct.App.1992). 8 . State v. Reese, 370 S.C. 31, 36, 633 S.E.2d 898, 900 (2006). 9 . State v. Crosby, 355 S.C. 47, 52, 584 S.E.2d 110, 112 (2003). 10 . State v. Chatman, 336 S.C. 149, 519 S.E.2d 100 (1999). 11 . Id. at 152-53, 519 S.E.2d at 101-02. 12 . Id. at 15 819, 821-22 (Ct.App.1991) (<HOLDING>); State v. Craig, 267 S.C. 262, 269, 227 S.E.2d
holding that the erroneous admission of a hearsay statement that identified the defendant as the shooter was harmless where the defendant never contested that he shot the gun but claimed only that he shot in selfdefense holding the defendant was not entitled to a charge of involuntary manslaughter where there was no evidence that he involuntarily pulled his gun and shot the victim noting the act must be unintentional to constitute criminal negligence holding that before a defendant is entitled to introduce evidence of the victims character for violence there must be sufficient evidence to support a finding that the victim was the first aggressor and that once the defendant testified that he was attacked and cut by the victim without provocation before using the victims utility tool to stab the victim the defendant was clearly entitled to question the victim about past acts of violence reflected in court documents from the state of oregon holding that evidence was sufficient to prove defendant constructively possessed the gun where although defendant denied ownership of the gun it was found near a knife of which defendant claimed ownership and where defendant was aware of the presence of the gun holding that there was evidence of grossly excessive force where the defendant shot the victim once in the arm and then in the base of the skull