State v. Blocker

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: July 6, 2007
• Docket: 2007-UP-346
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Elbert Blocker, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Aiken County
 Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-346
Submitted June 1, 2007 – Filed July 6, 2007

---

AFFIRMED

---

Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barbara R. Morgan, of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Elbert Blocker appeals his conviction for criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree, arguing the trial court erred by refusing to grant a directed verdict in his favor when there was insufficient evidence to link him to the assault because Victim and Roshonda’s testimonies were neither reliable nor consistent, and no physical evidence from the scene or Victim’s body linked Blocker to the assault. 

We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Freiburger, 366 S.C. 125, 134, 620 S.E.2d 737, 741 (2005) (holding that to preserve an issue for appellate review, the issue must have been specifically raised to and ruled upon by the trial court); Bodiford v. Spanish Oaks Farms, Inc., 317 S.C. 539, 547, 455 S.E.2d 194, 198-99 (Ct. App. 1995) (noting the appellate court need not address a point that is manifestly without merit).

AFFIRMED. [1]

HEARN, C.J., KITTREDGE, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

---

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