State v. Albert Ashby

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.

Albert Ashby, Appellant.

Appeal from Orangeburg County

Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-106

Submitted January 4, 2010 – Filed February
8, 2010   

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Assistant Chief Legal Counsel J. Benjamin
Aplin, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Albert
Ashby appeals the revocation of his probation, arguing the circuit court erred
in failing to make a finding that his probation violations were willful.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:   State v.
Bryant, 383 S.C. 410, 418, 680 S.E.2d
11, 15 (Ct. App. 2009) (holding the failure to raise the issue of willfulness
at a probation revocation hearing renders the issue not preserved for appellate
review); State v. Hamilton, 333 S.C. 642, 649, 511 S.E.2d 94, 97 (Ct.
App. 1999) (holding no finding of willfulness is necessary where conditions of
probation other than failure to pay were violated); State v. Allen, 370
S.C. 88, 102, 634 S.E.2d 653, 660 (2006) (when the trial court's
revocation decision is upheld on one ground, it ordinarily is immaterial
whether probation was properly revoked on other grounds unless the entire
proceeding was tainted by a given error).

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS,
PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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