City of Clover v. Broome

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

City of Clover, Respondent,

v.

Roosevelt Broome, Jr., Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2011-193888

Appeal From York County
J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-018
Submitted December 3, 2012 – Filed January 16, 2013

AFFIRMED

Roosevelt Broome, Jr., of Charlotte, NC, pro se.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities:

1. As to whether the circuit court erred in failing to prove jurisdiction: State v.
Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003) ("In order for an issue
to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been raised to and ruled upon by
the trial [court.] Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be
considered on appeal.").

2. As to whether the circuit court erred in affirming the municipal court's finding
that the police officer's absence from trial was lawful: Dunbar, 356 S.C. at 142,
587 S.E.2d at 693-94 ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it
must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court.] Issues not raised and
ruled upon in the trial court will not be considered on appeal.").

3. As to whether the circuit court erred in allowing the police department to
proceed with matters affected by this appeal: Dunbar, 356 S.C. at 142, 587 S.E.2d
at 693-94 ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must have
been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court.] Issues not raised and ruled upon
in the trial court will not be considered on appeal.").

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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