State v. James B. Curry ( 2024 )


Menu:
  • 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.
    James B. Curry, Appellant.
    Appellate Case No. 2022-001104
    Appeal From Chester County
    Brian M. Gibbons, Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2024-UP-391
    Submitted November 21, 2024 – Filed November 27, 2024
    AFFIRMED
    Appellate Defender Jessica M. Saxon, of Columbia, for
    Appellant.
    Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior
    Assistant Deputy Attorney General Mark Reynolds
    Farthing, both of Columbia; and Solicitor Randy E.
    Newman, Jr., of Lancaster, all for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: James B. Curry appeals the circuit court's order denying his
    motion for recusal and forfeiting Curry's earned work, education, or good conduct
    credits pursuant to section 24-27-200 of the South Carolina Code (2025). On
    appeal, Curry argues (1) the circuit court erred by applying section 24-27-200
    because that section is only applicable to civil pleadings and actions filed by
    inmates and (2) the circuit court judge erred by failing to recuse himself from the
    action after he made an earlier finding Curry asserts was factually unsupported.
    We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.
    1. We hold Curry failed to preserve his argument that the circuit court erred in
    applying section 24-27-200 and forfeiting any earned work, education, or good
    conduct credits because he did not object or argue against its application at the
    hearing or in his post-hearing motion. See State v. Dunbar, 
    356 S.C. 138
    , 142, 
    587 S.E.2d 691
    , 693 (2003) ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review,
    it must have been raised to and ruled upon by the [circuit court]."). 1
    2. We hold the circuit court judge did not err by refusing to recuse himself because
    Curry failed to show evidence of bias or prejudice that would warrant recusal. See
    Patel v. Patel, 
    359 S.C. 515
    , 524, 
    599 S.E.2d 114
    , 118 (2004) ("It is not sufficient
    for a party seeking disqualification to simply allege bias; the party must show
    evidence of bias or prejudice."); Mallet v. Mallet, 
    323 S.C. 141
    , 147, 
    473 S.E.2d 804
    , 808 (Ct. App. 1996) (finding no evidence in the record "to manifest
    impartiality"); 
    id.
     ("The fact a [circuit court] judge ultimately rules against a
    litigant is not proof of prejudice by the judge, even if it is later held the judge
    committed error in his rulings."); Patel, 
    359 S.C. at 524
    , 
    599 S.E.2d at 118
     (stating
    South Carolina appellate courts will not reverse a judge's decision not to disqualify
    himself if there was no evidence of judicial prejudice).
    AFFIRMED. 2
    KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.
    1
    We express no opinion on the circuit court's application of section 24-27-200.
    2
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2024-UP-391

Filed Date: 11/27/2024

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/27/2024