State v. Frasier

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.
Daniel Maurice Frasier, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2016-000607
Appeal From Charleston County
William P. Keesley, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-197
Submitted April 1, 2017 – Filed May 11, 2017
AFFIRMED
Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of
Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Megan Harrigan Jameson, 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. Rogers, 361 S.C. 178, 183, 603 S.E.2d 910, 912-13 (Ct. App.
2004) (holding for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must be "(1)
raised to and ruled upon by the trial court, (2) raised by the appellant, (3) raised in
a timely manner, and (4) raised to the trial court with sufficient specificity"); 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. George, 323 S.C.
496, 510-11, 476 S.E.2d 903, 911-12 (1996) ("If the trial [court] sustains a timely
objection to testimony and gives the jury a curative instruction to disregard the
testimony, the error is deemed to be cured."); id. ("No issue is preserved for
appellate review if the objecting party accepts the [trial court's] ruling and does not
contemporaneously make an additional objection to the sufficiency of the curative
charge or move for a mistrial.").
AFFIRMED.1
GEATHERS, MCDONALD, and HILL, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.