State v. Rowland

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.
Joseph Todd Rowland, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2014-001051
Appeal From Charleston County
Roger M. Young, Sr., Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-225
Submitted April 1, 2017 – Filed May 24, 2017
AFFIRMED
Mark Andrew Peper, Sr., of The Peper Law Firm, PA, of
Charleston, for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of
Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of
Charleston, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003)
("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been
raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the
trial court will not be considered on appeal."); State v. Smith, 337 S.C. 27, 32, 522
S.E.2d 598, 600 (1999) ("A ruling in limine is not final; unless an objection is
made at the time the evidence is offered and a final ruling procured, the issue is not
preserved for review."); State v. Butler, 407 S.C. 376, 381, 755 S.E.2d 457, 460
(2014) ("On appeal from the denial of a directed verdict, this [c]ourt views the
evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the State.");
State v. Bennett, 415 S.C. 232, 235, 781 S.E.2d 352, 353 (2016) ("The [c]ourt's
review is limited to considering the existence or nonexistence of evidence, not its
weight."); State v. Cherry, 361 S.C. 588, 593-94, 606 S.E.2d 475, 478 (2004) ("If
there is any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial evidence reasonably
tending to prove the guilt of the accused, an appellate court must find the case was
properly submitted to the jury."); State v. Mollison, 319 S.C. 41, 45, 459 S.E.2d 88,
91 (Ct. App. 1995) ("Constructive possession occurs when the person charged with
possession has dominion and control over either the drugs or the premises upon
which the drugs were found.").
AFFIRMED.1
WILLIAMS and KONDUROS, JJ., and LEE, A.J., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.