State v. Gamble

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.

Ervin Gamble, Appellant.

Appeal From Horry County

Benjamin H. Culbertson, Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.   2011-UP-095

Submitted January 4, 2011 – Filed March
10, 2011

AFFIRMED

Jerry L. Finney and Adam L. Whitsett, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W.
Elliott, Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia;
and Solicitor J. Gregory Hembree, of Conway, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Ervin Gamble appeals his conviction of trafficking in heroin.   We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following:

1. We find no
reversible error in the trial court's admission of evidence: State v. Patterson,
324 S.C. 5, 17, 482 S.E.2d 760, 766 (1997) (stating a general objection is insufficient
to preserve an issue for appellate review); State v. Williams, 303 S.C.
410, 411, 401 S.E.2d 168, 169 (1991) (stating an objection must be made at the
earliest opportunity to preserve an issue for appellate review). 

2. We likewise find no
reversible error in the trial court's denial of Gamble's motion for a directed
verdict: State v. Green, 350 S.C. 580, 585, 567 S.E.2d 505, 508 (Ct.
App. 2002) (concluding the appropriate "vehicle
for challenging the admissibility of evidence based on an alleged search and
seizure violation is a motion to suppress").

3. We
affirm the trial court's denial of Gamble's motion for judgment notwithstanding
the verdict:  State v. Follin, 352 S.C. 235, 258, 573 S.E.2d 812, 824
(Ct. App. 2002) (stating a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is a
civil trial motion and is improper in a criminal trial).

4. We
affirm the trial court's denial of Gamble's motion for a new trial:   State
v. Tumbleston, 376 S.C. 90, 102, 654 S.E.2d 849, 855-56 (Ct. App. 2007)
(finding an issue is deemed abandoned if the argument is raised in a brief, but
not supported by authority).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., SHORT and WILLIAMS,
JJ., concur.

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