State v. Wright

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 of South Carolina,       
Respondent,

v.

Andris A.
Wright,        Appellant.

Appeal From York County

Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.
2005-UP-494

Submitted August 1, 2005 – Filed August 22, 2005  

AFFIRMED

Acting Deputy Chief Attorney
Wanda H. Carter, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry D.
McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant
Attorney General Deborah R. J. Shupe, Office of the Attorney General, of
Columbia; and  Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Andris A. Wright
appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana. 
He argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the drugs
because the search and seizure violated his Fourth Amendment rights.  We
affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities: United
States v. Sakyi, 160 F.3d 164 (4th Cir. 1998) (holding that after a lawful
traffic stop, an officer having reasonable suspicion that illegal drugs are in a
vehicle may order occupants out and pat them down briefly for weapons to ensure
the safety of the officer and others, even in the absence of other factors
raising safety concerns); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 577 S.E.2d 498
(Ct. App. 2003) (adopting the Sakyi rule in this state).

AFFIRMED.[1]

GOOLSBY, BEATTY, and SHORT, JJ.,
concur.

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