State v. Dudley

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, Appellant,

v.

Norman B. Dudley, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2015-001785

Appeal From Berkeley County
J. C. Nicholson, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-248
Submitted December 12, 2017 – Filed June 13, 2018

AFFIRMED

Marcus Keith Gore, South Carolina Department of Public
Safety, of Blythewood, for Appellant.

Norman B. Dudley, of Summerville, pro se.

PER CURIAM: The State appeals the circuit court's order dismissing its appeal
from the magistrate's court because it was untimely. The State contends the circuit
court erred in finding the State had ten days to appeal the magistrate's court's
dismissal of a driving under the influence (DUI) charge against Norman B. Dudley
instead of thirty days. We affirm.
The State argues the circuit court erred by applying the ten-day rule from section
18-3-30 of the South Carolina Code (2014).1 The State instead maintains it has
thirty days to file an appeal from the magistrate's court under Rule 74, SCRCP.2
The State asserts section 18-3-30 applies only to criminal defendants and the
State's right to appeal is instead governed by case law.

The circuit court's order found the magistrate's court issued its decision on
December 3, 2013. The circuit court's order also indicated the State filed its appeal
to the circuit court on January 3, 2014. The State has not appealed either of these
findings. Accordingly, they are the law of the case. See Rumpf v. Mass. Mut. Life
Ins. Co., 357 S.C. 386, 398, 593 S.E.2d 183, 189 (Ct. App. 2004) ("Any
unappealed portion of the trial court's judgment is the law of the case, and must
therefore be affirmed."). The date on which the circuit court found the appeal was
filed—January 3—was thirty-one days after the date the circuit court found the
State received notice of the magistrate's court's decision. Because the law of the
case is that the appeal was filed more than thirty days after notice of the decision,
the State's filing of appeal was late even under Rule 74, not just section 18-3-30.
See Law v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 368 S.C. 424, 440 n.3, 629 S.E.2d 642, 651 n.3
(2006) ("[An appellate] court may affirm the trial court based on any ground found
in the record." (citing Rule 220(c), SCACR)).

AFFIRMED.3

SHORT, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

1
Section 18-3-30 provides in part, "The appellant, within ten days after sentence,
shall file notice of appeal with the clerk of circuit court and shall serve notice of
appeal upon the magistrate . . . and upon the designated agent for the prosecuting
agency or attorney who prosecuted the charge . . . ." § 18-3-30(A) (emphases
added). The next subsection states, "A person convicted in magistrate[']s court . . .
may appeal his conviction within the time allotted . . . ." § 18-3-30(B) (emphases
added).
2
Rule 74, SCRCP, provides, "Notice of appeal to the circuit court must be served
on all parties within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice of the judgment,
order[,] or decision appealed from."
3
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.