Tate v. State of South Carolina

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

Jay Walter
Tate, Appellant,

v.

State of South
Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Cherokee County

Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2009-UP-413

Submitted September 1, 2009 – Filed
September 2, 2009

AFFIRMED

Rodney Wade Richey, of Greenville, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
and Assistant Attorney General S. Prentiss Counts, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: 
Jay Walter Tate appeals the circuit court's dismissal of his writ of mandamus
that requested numerous items from a solicitor and the grand jury foreperson.   We
affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Miller v. State,
377 S.C. 99, 101, 659 S.E.2d 492, 493 (2008) ("Mandamus is the highest
judicial writ and is issued to compel a public official to perform a
ministerial duty, not a discretionary duty, and only when there is a specific
right to be enforced, a positive duty to be performed, and no other available
legal remedy."); Charleston County Sch. Dist. v. Charleston County
Election Comm'n, 336 S.C. 174, 179, 519 S.E.2d 567, 570 (1999) (explaining
the decision whether to issue a writ of mandamus lies within the discretion of
the trial court, and an appellate court will not overturn the decision unless
the trial court has abused its discretion); Willimon v. City of Greenville,
243 S.C. 82, 89, 132 S.E.2d 169, 170 (1963) ("When the legal right is
doubtful . . . a writ of mandamus
cannot rightfully issue.").

AFFIRMED.[1]

HEARN, C.J., KONDUROS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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