State v. Burke

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.

Christopher
Lovett Burke, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

 John C. Few, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-550

Submitted November 1, 2007 – Filed
December 14, 2007

AFFIRMED

Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, South Carolina Commission of
Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior
Asst. Attorney General Norman Mark Rapoport, Office of the Attorney General, of
Columbia; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v.
Floyd, 295 S.C. 518, 520, 369 S.E.2d 842, 843 (1988) (noting a ruling on a
motion in limine is not the ultimate disposition on the admissibility of
evidence, but remains subject to change based upon developments during the
trial); State v. Smith, 337 S.C. 27, 32, 522 S.E.2d 598, 600 (1999) (“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.”).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF
and PIEPER, JJ., and CURETON, AJ., concur. 

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