State v. Medina

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.

Santos Medina, Appellant.

Appeal From Lexington County

 William P. Keesley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-124

Submitted March 2, 2009 – Filed March 5,
2009

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior
Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor
Donald V. Myers,  of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Santos Medina appeals his conviction and sentence for assault and battery of a high and
aggravated nature (ABHAN), arguing the trial court improperly instructed the
jury on the required mental state for ABHAN.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Conyers, 326 S.C. 263, 266, 487 S.E.2d 181,
183 (1997) (explaining an issue must be raised
and ruled upon in the trial court in order to be preserved for appellate
review); State v. Kennerly, 331 S.C. 442, 455, 503 S.E.2d 214,
221 (Ct. App. 1998) (stating a party cannot argue
one ground at trial and then an alternative ground on appeal). 

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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