¶1 Appellant was convicted of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature and of carrying a concealed weapon and was sentenced to concurrent terms of eight (8) years and one (1) year, respectively. He contends the trial judge erroneously refused to charge the law of self-defense. We agree.
¶2 On December 25,1982, appellant and Rowland Tomlin were involved in a shooting incident at the apartment of appellant’s ex-wife. At trial, appellant testified he shot Tomlin after Tomlin took out a gun and began shooting at him.
¶3 The trial j udge’s refusal to charge the law applicable to self-defense was error because appellant’s testimony constituted sufficient evidence from which the jury could infer that appellant acted in self-defense. State v. Adkinson, 311 S. E. (2d) 79 (1984); State v. Jackson, 227 S. C. 271, 87 S. E. (2d) 681 (1955).
¶4 Appellant’s other exceptions are without merit and are *11 dismissed under Rule 23 of the Rules of Practice of this Court.
¶5 Accordingly, appellant’s conviction on the charge of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature is reversed and remanded for a new trial; the conviction for carrying a concealed weapon is affirmed.