CourtListener 10155621•State v. Wilson
Texte intégral
THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
v.
Eric Wilson, Appellant.
Appeal From Darlington County
James E. Lockemy, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-173
Submitted April 1, 2009 Filed April 27,
2009
AFFIRMED
Chief Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for
Appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh; Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Assistant
Attorney General J. Anthony Mabry, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Jay E. Hodge,
Jr., of Cheraw, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Eric Wilson appeals from a jury verdict finding him
guilty of murder and the possession of a firearm during the commission of a
violent crime. Wilson argues the circuit court erred in preventing him from
impeaching the testimony of the State's key witness. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the
following authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003) (internal
citations omitted) (contending a party
may not argue one ground at trial and an alternate ground on appeal); Ex parte McMillan, 319 S.C. 331, 337, 461 S.E.2d 43, 46 (1995)
(declaring a party cannot raise an
argument for the first time on appeal); Courie v.
Courie, 288 S.C. 163, 167, 341 S.E.2d
646, 648 (Ct. App. 1986) (explaining a party cannot allege error occurred at
trial where counsel "voluntarily
failed to pursue a permitted line
of questioning").
AFFIRMED.[1]
Huff,
Williams, and Konduros, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215, SCACR.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.