State v. Freeman

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.

Randolph Scott
Freeman, Appellant.

Appeal From Pickens County

D. Garrison Hill, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-368

Submitted June 1, 2010 – Filed July 14,
2010   

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

J. Benjamin Aplin, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Randolph Scott Freeman was convicted of indecent
exposure and sentenced to three years' imprisonment.  The trial court also
revoked his probation in full for a second-degree burglary conviction, ordering
it to be served consecutively with his indecent exposure sentence. On appeal, Freeman
argues the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because he was not
served or arrested on a probation violation warrant prior to his probation
being revoked.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code
Ann. §  24-21-300 (2007) (stating a citation and affidavit can be issued and
served in lieu of a probation violation warrant for probation revocation); State
v. Howard, 384 S.C. 212, 224, 682 S.E.2d 42, 48 (Ct. App. 2009) (finding
the trial court had jurisdiction to revoke probation because defendant was
served with the citation and affidavit during the sentencing hearing and prior
to revoking probation).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT,
KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215, SCACR.