State v. Rogers

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: June 1, 2016
• Docket: 2016-UP-245
• Status: Unpublished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.

Rodney Lee Rogers, Sr., Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2014-000980

Appeal From Greenwood County Thomas L. Hughston, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-245 Submitted April 1, 2016 – Filed June 1, 2016

AFFIRMED

Oscar W. Bannister, of Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General David A. Spencer, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Matthew Stumbo, of Greenwood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Stone, 285 S.C. 386, 387, 330 S.E.2d 286, 287 (1985) ("[A] defendant's failure to object to the charge as made or to request an additional charge, when an opportunity has been afforded to do so, results in a waiver of his right to complain about the charge on appeal."); State v. Gentry, 363 S.C. 93, 100, 610 S.E.2d 494, 498 (2005) ("[S]ubject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong, and . . . issues related to subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time." (citation omitted)); id. at 101, 610 S.E.2d at 499 ("Circuit courts obviously have subject matter jurisdiction to try criminal matters."); id. at 102 n.6, 610 S.E.2d at 499 n.6 ("[A] presentment of an indictment or a waiver of presentment is not needed to confer subject matter jurisdiction on the circuit court.").

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT and THOMAS, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

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