State v. Rollins

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. Rollins

DecidedJune 2, 2009

Docket2009-UP-264

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Rollins (State v. Rollins) 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. Rollins, (S.C. Ct. App. 2009).

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.

Myrtle Elizabeth Rollins, Appellant.

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

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-264
Submitted May 1, 2009 Filed June 2, 2009

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,

Assistant Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Kevin Scott Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Myrtle Elizabeth Rollins appeals her two-year sentence for attempt to obtain a controlled substance by fraud following her termination from the York County Drug Court Program (Drug Court). We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to whether the trial court erred in finding Rollins did not successfully complete Drug Court: State v. Lee, 350 S.C. 125, 130, 564 S.E.2d 372, 75 (Ct. App. 2002) (stating an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial court to be preserved for appellate review).

2. As to whether the trial court erred in failing to exercise its discretion to reduce Rollinss original sentence: Rule 29, SCRCrimP (Except for motions for new trials based on after-discovered evidence, post-trial motions shall be made within ten days after the imposition of the sentence.); State v. Campbell, 376 S.C. 212, 215-16, 656 S.E.2d 371, 373 (2008) (explaining the long-standing rule of law that a trial court is without jurisdiction to consider a criminal matter once the term of court during which judgment was entered expires); State v. Perkins, 378 S.C. 57, 61, 661 S.E.2d 366, 368 (2008) (upholding the imposition of an appellants original sentence where it found the trial court correctly determined that appellant violated a condition of the suspended sentence, and therefore, properly imposed appellants original sentence).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER, and GEATHERS, 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.

Myrtle Elizabeth Rollins, Appellant.

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

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-264
Submitted May 1, 2009 Filed June 2, 2009

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,

Assistant Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Kevin Scott Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Myrtle Elizabeth Rollins appeals her two-year sentence for attempt to obtain a controlled substance by fraud following her termination from the York County Drug Court Program (Drug Court). We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to whether the trial court erred in finding Rollins did not successfully complete Drug Court: State v. Lee, 350 S.C. 125, 130, 564 S.E.2d 372, 75 (Ct. App. 2002) (stating an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial court to be preserved for appellate review).

2. As to whether the trial court erred in failing to exercise its discretion to reduce Rollinss original sentence: Rule 29, SCRCrimP (Except for motions for new trials based on after-discovered evidence, post-trial motions shall be made within ten days after the imposition of the sentence.); State v. Campbell, 376 S.C. 212, 215-16, 656 S.E.2d 371, 373 (2008) (explaining the long-standing rule of law that a trial court is without jurisdiction to consider a criminal matter once the term of court during which judgment was entered expires); State v. Perkins, 378 S.C. 57, 61, 661 S.E.2d 366, 368 (2008) (upholding the imposition of an appellants original sentence where it found the trial court correctly determined that appellant violated a condition of the suspended sentence, and therefore, properly imposed appellants original sentence).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Rollins, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rollins-scctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack