In the Interest of James F.

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

In the Interest of James F., a Juvenile Under the Age of
Seventeen, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2012-213534

Appeal From Richland County
W. Thomas Sprott, Jr., Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-005
Submitted November 1, 2014 – Filed January 7, 2015

AFFIRMED

Chief Appellate Defender Robert Michael Dudek, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Senior Assistant
Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant
Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., and Solicitor
Daniel Edward Johnson, all of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 17-23-175(A) (2014) ("In a . . . delinquency
proceeding in family court, an out-of-court statement of a child is admissible if . . .
the child testifies at the proceeding and is subject to cross-[]examination . . . .");
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 59 n.9 (2004) ("[W]hen the declarant
appears for cross-examination at trial, the Confrontation Clause places no
constraints at all on the use of his prior testimonial statements."); Pennsylvania v.
Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39, 52 (1987) ("[T]he right to confrontation is a trial right,
designed to prevent improper restrictions on the types of questions that defense
counsel may ask during cross-examination.").

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, SHORT, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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