State v. Coakley

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. Coakley

DecidedJune 15, 2016

Docket2016-UP-285

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Coakley (State v. Coakley) 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. Coakley, (S.C. Ct. App. 2016).

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.

Pendral Coakley, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2014-001229

Appeal From Orangeburg County Kristi Lea Harrington, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-285 Submitted March 1, 2016 – Filed June 15, 2016

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Benjamin John Tripp, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Ellis Roberts, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003) ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court]. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be considered on appeal."); State v. Passmore, 363 S.C. 568, 584, 611 S.E.2d 273, 281 (Ct. App. 2005) ("Imposing this preservation requirement on the appellant is meant to enable the [trial] court to rule properly after it has considered all relevant facts, law, and arguments." (quoting I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. Pleasant, 338 S.C. 406, 422, 526 S.E.2d 716, 724 (2000))).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, SHORT, and THOMAS, 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.

Pendral Coakley, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2014-001229

Appeal From Orangeburg County Kristi Lea Harrington, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-285 Submitted March 1, 2016 – Filed June 15, 2016

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Benjamin John Tripp, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Ellis Roberts, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003) ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court]. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be considered on appeal."); State v. Passmore, 363 S.C. 568, 584, 611 S.E.2d 273, 281 (Ct. App. 2005) ("Imposing this preservation requirement on the appellant is meant to enable the [trial] court to rule properly after it has considered all relevant facts, law, and arguments." (quoting I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. Pleasant, 338 S.C. 406, 422, 526 S.E.2d 716, 724 (2000))).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, SHORT, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Coakley, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-coakley-scctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack