CourtListener 10136832•State v. Wilds
Gesamter Gesetzestext
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State,
Respondent,
v.
Israel Wilds,
Appellant.
Appeal From
Richland County
Marc H.
Westbrook, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished
Opinion No. 03-UP-152
Submitted
January 13, 2003 Filed February 20, 2003
AFFIRMED
Deputy Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz,
III, of Columbia, for appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster,
Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney
General Donald J. Zelenka, of Columbia; Warren Blair Giese, of Columbia; for
respondent.
PER CURIAM: Israel Wilds appeals his convictions for murder and armed
robbery, arguing the trial court erred in limiting cross-examination of two
of the State=s witnesses.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:
State v. Sims, 348 S.C. 16, 26 n.2, 558 S.E.2d 518, 524 n.2 (2002)
(AOn appeal, appellant also argues the trial court=s ruling violated the Sixth
Amendment of the Constitution; however, this issue is not preserved for review
because it was not raised at trial.@); State v. Prioleau, 345 S.C.
404, 411, 548 S.E.2d 213, 216 (2001) (AIn order to preserve for review an
alleged error in admitting evidence an objection should be sufficiently specific
to bring into focus the precise nature of the alleged error so it can be reasonably
understood by the trial judge.@); State v. Hoffman, 312 S.C. 386, 393,
440 S.E.2d 869, 873 (1994) (AThe issue which is not properly preserved cannot
be raised for the first time on appeal.@).
AFFIRMED.
GOOLSBY, HUFF, and SHULER, JJ., concur.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.