State v. Adams

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. Adams

DecidedJanuary 4, 2012

Docket2012-UP-006

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Adams (State v. Adams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Adams, (S.C. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

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.

Willie James Adams, Jr., Appellant.

Appeal From Fairfield County
Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-006
Submitted December 1, 2011 Filed January 4, 2012

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and Assistant Attorney General Brendan J. McDonald, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Douglas A. Barfield, Jr., of Lancaster, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Willie James Adams, Jr. appeals his conviction for murder, arguing the trial court erred in admitting testimony regarding quantities of cocaine and cocaine base found at the murder scene. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693 (2003) (stating for an issue to be properly preserved for appellate review, the issue must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court); State v. Simpson, 325 S.C. 37, 42, 479 S.E.2d 57, 60 (1996) ("Unless an objection is made at the time the evidence is offered and a final ruling made, the issue is not preserved for review."); State v. Moultrie, 316 S.C. 547, 555-56, 451 S.E.2d 34, 39 (Ct. App. 1994) ("[A] 'failure to contemporaneously object' to the introduction of evidence claimed to be prejudicial 'cannot be later bootstrapped by a motion for a mistrial.'" (quoting State v. Lynn, 277 S.C. 222, 226, 284 S.E.2d 786, 789 (1981))).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, WILLIAMS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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.

Willie James Adams, Jr., Appellant.

Appeal From Fairfield County
Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-006
Submitted December 1, 2011 Filed January 4, 2012

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and Assistant Attorney General Brendan J. McDonald, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Douglas A. Barfield, Jr., of Lancaster, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Willie James Adams, Jr. appeals his conviction for murder, arguing the trial court erred in admitting testimony regarding quantities of cocaine and cocaine base found at the murder scene. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693 (2003) (stating for an issue to be properly preserved for appellate review, the issue must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court); State v. Simpson, 325 S.C. 37, 42, 479 S.E.2d 57, 60 (1996) ("Unless an objection is made at the time the evidence is offered and a final ruling made, the issue is not preserved for review."); State v. Moultrie, 316 S.C. 547, 555-56, 451 S.E.2d 34, 39 (Ct. App. 1994) ("[A] 'failure to contemporaneously object' to the introduction of evidence claimed to be prejudicial 'cannot be later bootstrapped by a motion for a mistrial.'" (quoting State v. Lynn, 277 S.C. 222, 226, 284 S.E.2d 786, 789 (1981))).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, WILLIAMS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Adams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-adams-scctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack