State v. Pennington

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.

Edward Lee Pennington, Appellant.

Appeal From Cherokee County

 J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.2007-UP-212

Submitted May 1, 2007 – Filed May 11, 2007   

AFFIRMED

Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for Appellant.

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

PER CURIAM:  Appellant argues the trial judge erred in refusing to instruct the jury on accessory after the fact.  Appellant, however, did not object to the initial charge nor the recharge.  Therefore, this issue is not preserved for appeal.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and State v. Rogers, 361 S.C. 178, 183, 603 S.E.2d 910, 912-13 (Ct. App. 2004) (holding that to preserve an issue for appellate review the issue must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge, raised by the appellant, raised in a timely manner, and raised to the trial judge with sufficient specificity).

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., and GOOLSBY and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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