State v. Pope

THIS OPINION HAS NO
PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY
PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Lisa Peterson
Pope, Appellant.

Appeal From York County

 G. Edward Welmaker, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-568

Submitted October 1, 2008 – Filed October
13, 2008

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Katherine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Deputy Director Theresa A. Knox, Tommy Evans, Jr., J. Benjamin
Aplin, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Lisa
Peterson Pope pled guilty to possession of crack cocaine and was sentenced to
five years, suspended upon the service of two years probation, with probation
to terminate upon payment of fines and fees after one year.  Following a
probation revocation hearing, the court revoked forty-two months of her
suspended sentence and terminated her probation.  Pope appeals, arguing the
circuit court erred in revoking her probation for failure to re-report to the Restitution Center when the Restitution Center was not part of the original sentence and the
only monies owed at the time of the revocation were supervision fees.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and
the following authorities:  State v.
Lee,  350 S.C. 125, 129-30, 564
S.E.2d 372, 374-75 (Ct. App. 2002) (noting in probation revocation appeal that
an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved
for appellate review);  State v. Shumate, 276 S.C. 46, 47, 275 S.E.2d
288, 288 (1981) (holding where appellant’s contention was not advanced at the
probation revocation hearing, failure to object or seek modification of the
revocation sentence in the trial court foreclosed consideration of issue on
appeal).

AFFIRMED.

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

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