In the Interest of Carl S. G.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

In the Interest of Carl S. G., Jr., A Juvenile under the
Age of Seventeen,                   Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

Leslie K. Riddle, Family Court Judge

H. Bruce Williams, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-597

Submitted August 20, 2003 – Filed
October 20, 2003

AFFIRMED

Jennifer N. Williams, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Warren B. Giese, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Carl S. G., Jr. was
charged with two counts of hit and run, driving under the influence, and five
counts of assault with intent to kill.  He pled guilty to one count of
hit and run, driving under the influence, and three counts of assault with intent
to kill.  The judge ordered him to undergo an evaluation.  After undergoing
the evaluation, another family court judge ordered him to be committed to the
Department of Juvenile Justice for a term not to exceed his twenty-first birthday. 
Carl S. G., Jr. appeals, arguing the family court lacked subject matter jurisdiction
to accept the guilty plea to the three counts of assault with intent to kill
because the petition failed to inform the juvenile of the elements of the offense
and the case should be remanded to the family court judge who presided over
the adjudicatory hearing for disposition in accordance with Rule 37, SCRFC.

We affirm
[1] pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 14-8-250 (Supp. 2002), Rule 220(b)(2),
SCACR, and the following authorities:  I.  Subject Matter Jurisdiction: 
In re Jason T., 340 S.C. 455, 531 S.E.2d 544 (Ct. App. 2000) (finding
the family court has subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a juvenile delinquent
if the petition sufficiently states the offense in order for the defendant to
know what he is called upon to answer). 

II.  Rule 37, SCRFC:  In re Arisha K.
S., 331 S.C. 288, 501 S.E.2d 128 (Ct. App. 1998) (ruling to be preserved
for appellate review, an issue must have been raised to and ruled upon by the
family court judge). 

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., ANDERSON and CURETON, JJ., concur.

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