State v. Flood

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. Flood

DecidedApril 10, 2013

Docket2013-UP-140

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Flood (State v. Flood) 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. Flood, (S.C. Ct. App. 2013).

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.

Cedric Flood, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2011-196546

Appeal From Orangeburg County Edgar W. Dickson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-140 Submitted February 1, 2013 – Filed April 10, 2013

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Susan B. Hackett, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Julie K. Keeney, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe, 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 judge. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be considered on appeal."); Pinckney v. Pettijohn Builders, Inc., 289 S.C. 405, 407, 346 S.E.2d 533, 534 (Ct. App. 1986) (holding a party may not argue on appeal that a jury charge was erroneous where trial counsel stated he had no objection to a specific aspect of the jury charge).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, 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.

Cedric Flood, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2011-196546

Appeal From Orangeburg County Edgar W. Dickson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-140 Submitted February 1, 2013 – Filed April 10, 2013

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Susan B. Hackett, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Julie K. Keeney, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe, 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 judge. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be considered on appeal."); Pinckney v. Pettijohn Builders, Inc., 289 S.C. 405, 407, 346 S.E.2d 533, 534 (Ct. App. 1986) (holding a party may not argue on appeal that a jury charge was erroneous where trial counsel stated he had no objection to a specific aspect of the jury charge).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Flood, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-flood-scctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack