State v. Hopkins

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.

Cedrict Hopkins, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2018-002060

Appeal From Richland County
L. Casey Manning, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2021-UP-301
Heard June 16, 2021 – Filed August 18, 2021

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Joanna Katherine Delany, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Matthew C. Buchanan, of the South Carolina Department
of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, of Columbia,
for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Cedrict Hopkins appeals the circuit court's order revoking his
probation, arguing the circuit court erred because the Department of Probation,
Parole and Pardon Services issued a probation violation citation after his term of
probation had expired. We affirm.
We find Hopkins failed to raise this issue to the circuit court during the probation
revocation hearing; rather, he raised it for the first time in his motion to reconsider.
Thus, this issue was not preserved for appellate review. See State v. Hamilton, 333
S.C. 642, 648, 511 S.E.2d 94, 96-97 (Ct. App. 1999) (stating that to be preserved
for review, an issue must be raised during the probation revocation hearing and
may not be raised for the first time in a motion for reconsideration).

AFFIRMED.

LOCKEMY, C.J., and HUFF and HEWITT, JJ., concur.