State v. Holliday

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: May 21, 2014
• Docket: 2014-UP-196
• Status: Unpublished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

The State, Respondent,

v.

Christopher Ryan Holliday, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2012-212010

Appeal From York County Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-196 Submitted May 1, 2014 – Filed May 21, 2014

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Goodwin, 384 S.C. 588, 603, 683 S.E.2d 500, 508 (Ct. App. 2009) ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court."); State v. Williams, 405 S.C. 263, 280, 747 S.E.2d 194, 203 (Ct. App. 2013) ("To preserve an issue regarding the admissibility of evidence, a contemporaneous objection must be made."); id. (explaining the failure to object when evidence is offered constitutes a waiver of the right to have the issue considered on appeal); State v. Wilson, 389 S.C. 579, 583, 698 S.E.2d 862, 864 (Ct. App. 2010) ("[A]n issue will not be preserved for review where the trial court sustains a party's objection to improper testimony and the party does not subsequently move to strike the testimony or for a mistrial.").

AFFIRMED.1

WILLIAMS, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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