State v. Smith ( 2018 )

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.
Robert Davis Smith, Jr., Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2016-000576
Appeal From Greenville County
Brian M. Gibbons, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-466
Submitted November 1, 2018 – Filed December 19, 2018
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Susan Barber Hackett, of Columbia,
for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of
Columbia; and Solicitor William Walter Wilkins, III, of
Greenville, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Baccus, 367 S.C. 41, 48, 625 S.E.2d 216, 220 (2006) ("In
criminal cases, the appellate court sits to review errors of law only."); id. ("The
trial [court]'s factual findings on whether evidence should be suppressed due to a
Fourth Amendment violation are reviewed for clear error."); State v. Wright, 391
S.C. 436, 442, 706 S.E.2d 324, 326 (2011) ("When reviewing a Fourth
Amendment search and seizure case, an appellate court must affirm if there is any
evidence to support the ruling."); Baccus, 367 S.C. at 49, 625 S.E.2d at 220("Probable cause for a warrantless arrest exists when the circumstances within the
arresting officer's knowledge are sufficient to lead a reasonable person to believe
that a crime has been committed by the person being arrested."); id. ("Whether
probable cause exists depends upon the totality of the circumstances surrounding
the information at the officer's disposal.").
AFFIRMED.1
KONDUROS, MCDONALD, and HILL, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.