State v. Smith

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.

Norris Hennesey
Smith, Appellant.

Appeal From Horry County

 Steven H. John, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-481 

Submitted October 1, 2011 – Filed October
28, 2011

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for Appellant.

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

PER CURIAM:  Norris Hennesey Smith appeals his
conviction for trafficking in cocaine, arguing the circuit court erred in
denying his motion to suppress evidence seized after law enforcement improperly
expanded the scope of a traffic stop.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Rule 220(c),
SCACR ("The appellate court may affirm any ruling, order, decision or
judgment upon any ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal."); Jones
v. Lott, 387 S.C. 339, 346, 692 S.E.2d 900, 903 (2010) ("Under the two
issue rule, where a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate
court will affirm unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed
ground will become law of the case.").

AFFIRMED.

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

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