State v. Hardy

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.

Trince Hardy, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

Gordon G. Cooper, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2010-UP-404

Submitted September 1, 2010 – Filed
September 16, 2010

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A.
Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

J. Benjamin Aplin, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PERCURIAM:  Trince
Hardy appeals the revocation of his probation.  On appeal, Hardy argues the probation
revocation court erred in revoking his probation by improperly relying on pending
charges as evidence of his violations.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and
the following authority:  State v. Bryant, 383 S.C. 410, 418,
680 S.E.2d 11, 15 (Ct. App. 2009) (finding an
issue must be raised to and ruled upon in the probation revocation court to be preserved for appellate review). 

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., HUFF and
GEATHERS, JJ., concur. 

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