State v. Hill

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.

Travell Hill, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2010-158046

Appeal From Greenville County
G. Edward Welmaker, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-198
Heard May 6, 2013 – Filed May 15, 2013

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 Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia, and Solicitor
Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Travell Hill appeals his conviction for trafficking cocaine,
arguing the trial judge erred in (1) denying his motion to suppress the drug
evidence because his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the officer did
not have a reasonable suspicion that he was engaged in a serious criminal activity
so as to warrant a continued detention after the issuance of a warning for a traffic
stop, and (2) finding he lacked standing to challenge the lawfulness of the search
and seizure of the rental car he was driving. Counsel for Hill filed a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there were no meritorious
grounds for appeal and requesting permission to withdraw from further
representation. The Court denied the request to withdraw and directed the parties
to file additional briefs. After careful consideration of the record and briefs, the
judgment of the lower court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the
following authorities: State v. Atieh, 397 S.C. 641, 646, 725 S.E.2d 730, 733 (Ct.
App. 2012) ("A ruling in limine is not final; unless an objection is made at the time
the evidence is offered and a final ruling procured, the issue is not preserved for
review."); Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 335 S.C. 598, 613, 518
S.E.2d 591, 598 (1999) (holding an appellate court need not review remaining
issues when its determination of another issue is dispositive of the appeal).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.