State v. Rogers

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.

Rodney Lee Rogers, Sr., Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2014-000980

Appeal From Greenwood County
Thomas L. Hughston, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-245
Submitted April 1, 2016 – Filed June 1, 2016

AFFIRMED

Oscar W. Bannister, of Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey, LLC,
of Greenville, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior
Assistant Deputy Attorney General David A. Spencer,
both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Matthew Stumbo,
of Greenwood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: State v. Stone, 285 S.C. 386, 387, 330 S.E.2d 286, 287 (1985) ("[A]
defendant's failure to object to the charge as made or to request an additional
charge, when an opportunity has been afforded to do so, results in a waiver of his
right to complain about the charge on appeal."); State v. Gentry, 363 S.C. 93, 100,
610 S.E.2d 494, 498 (2005) ("[S]ubject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court
to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in
question belong, and . . . issues related to subject matter jurisdiction may be raised
at any time." (citation omitted)); id. at 101, 610 S.E.2d at 499 ("Circuit courts
obviously have subject matter jurisdiction to try criminal matters."); id. at 102 n.6,
610 S.E.2d at 499 n.6 ("[A] presentment of an indictment or a waiver of
presentment is not needed to confer subject matter jurisdiction on the circuit
court.").

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT and THOMAS, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

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