Cash v. State ( 2012 )

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
Ronnie Lee Cash, Petitioner,
v.
State of South Carolina, Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2009-116366
Appeal From Spartanburg County
James W. Johnson, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-527
Submitted August 1, 2012 – Filed September 12, 2012
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for
Petitioner.
Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Assistant
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Senior Assistant
Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant
Attorney General Suzanne H. White, all of Columbia, for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Petitioner was convicted of murder at trial. After a hearing, the
post-conviction relief (PCR) court found Petitioner was not entitled to a belated
direct appeal of his conviction. Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari
arguing the PCR court erred. We agreed, granted certiorari, and ordered the parties
to brief the direct appeal issue pursuant to White v. State, 263 S.C. 110, 208 S.E.2d
35 (1974).
On appeal, Petitioner argues the trial court erred in failing to grant a directed
verdict on the charge of murder. We affirm1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and
the following authorities: Graves v. Horry-Georgetown Technical Coll., 391 S.C.
1, 10, 704 S.E.2d 350, 355 (Ct. App. 2010) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be
raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by
the trial [court] to be preserved for appellate review." (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)); State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691,
694 (2003) ("A party may not argue one ground at trial and an alternate ground on
appeal."); State v. Tyndall, 336 S.C. 8, 16, 518 S.E.2d 278, 282 (Ct. App. 1999)
("Conclusory arguments constitute an abandonment of the issue on appeal.").
AFFIRMED.
SHORT, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.