State v. James

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.

Michael James, Appellant.

Appeal From Saluda County

Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-397

Submitted May 3, 2010 – Filed September
13, 2010   

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender LaNelle DuRant, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Salley W. Elliott, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr.,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Michael James appeals his conviction for
possession with intent to distribute cocaine, arguing the circuit court erred in
denying his motion for a mistrial due to comments made by the State in opening arguments.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v.
Hoffman, 312 S.C. 386, 393, 440 S.E.2d 869, 873 (1994) ("A contemporaneous
objection is required to properly preserve an error for appellate
review."); State v. Wilkins, 310 S.C. 81, 89, 425 S.E.2d 68, 73 (Ct.
App. 1992) (explaining the failure to make a contemporaneous objection during the State's opening argument waives a
defendant's "right to
complain later on"); see also State v. Lynn, 277 S.C.
222, 226, 284 S.E.2d 786, 789 (1981) ("Failure to contemporaneously
object . . . cannot be later bootstrapped by a motion for a mistrial.").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., THOMAS and
PIEPER, JJ., concur. 

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