State v. Burdine

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.

Bobby Lee
Burdine, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

Eugene C. Griffith, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-285 

Submitted June 1, 2011 – Filed June 13,
2011

AFFIRMED

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

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W.
Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., all of
Columbia; and Solicitor Barry Barnette, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Bobby
Lee Burdine appeals his conviction for resisting arrest, arguing the circuit
court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict because the State
failed to present sufficient evidence that his underlying arrest was lawful.  We
affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code
Ann. § 16-17-530 (2003) ("Any person who shall . . . be found on any
highway or public place . . . in a grossly intoxicated condition . . . shall be
deemed guilty of [public disorderly conduct]."); State v. Williams, 280
S.C. 305, 306, 312 S.E.2d 555, 556 (1984) (defining public places as
places "so situated that what passes there can
be seen by any considerable number of persons, if they happen to look" and
where "the public has an interest as affecting the safety, health, morals,
and welfare of the community." (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted)); State v. Galloway, 305 S.C. 258, 263, 407 S.E.2d 662,
665 (Ct. App. 1991) (holding that, "in the light most favorable to the
State, the officers' testimony [at trial] established the existence of probable
cause to arrest" the defendant, who was charged with resisting arrest).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., PIEPER and LOCKEMY,
JJ., concur.

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