State v. Eslick

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: November 9, 2011
• Docket: 2011-UP-498
• Status: Unpublished

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

State of South Carolina, Respondent,

v.

Martin Jeffrey Eslick, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Greenville County
 Charles B. Simmons, Jr., Special Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-498
Submitted November 1, 2011 – Filed November 9, 2011

---

AFFIRMED

---

J. Bradley Bennett, of Greenville, for Appellant.

David W. Holmes, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Martin Jeffrey Eslick appeals the circuit court's order dismissing his criminal appeal from the municipal court.  He argues the circuit court erred in dismissing his appeal because his notice of appeal sufficiently set forth proper legal grounds for his appeal.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  City of Rock Hill v. Suchenski, 374 S.C. 12, 15, 646 S.E.2d 879, 880 (2007) ("In criminal appeals from municipal court, the circuit court does not conduct a de novo review. . . .  [An] appellate court reviews errors of law only." (citations omitted)); Rogers v. State, 358 S.C. 266, 269, 594 S.E.2d 278, 279 (Ct. App. 2004) ("[Appellant] does not allege an error of law, but instead argues that evidence in the record fails to support . . . the municipal court's conclusion of his guilt . . . .").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., THOMAS and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

---

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