State v. James B. Curry

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.

James B. Curry, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2022-001104

Appeal From Chester County
Brian M. Gibbons, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2024-UP-391
Submitted November 21, 2024 – Filed November 27, 2024

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Jessica M. Saxon, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior
Assistant Deputy Attorney General Mark Reynolds
Farthing, both of Columbia; and Solicitor Randy E.
Newman, Jr., of Lancaster, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: James B. Curry appeals the circuit court's order denying his
motion for recusal and forfeiting Curry's earned work, education, or good conduct
credits pursuant to section 24-27-200 of the South Carolina Code (2025). On
appeal, Curry argues (1) the circuit court erred by applying section 24-27-200
because that section is only applicable to civil pleadings and actions filed by
inmates and (2) the circuit court judge erred by failing to recuse himself from the
action after he made an earlier finding Curry asserts was factually unsupported.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.

1. We hold Curry failed to preserve his argument that the circuit court erred in
applying section 24-27-200 and forfeiting any earned work, education, or good
conduct credits because he did not object or argue against its application at the
hearing or in his post-hearing motion. See State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587
S.E.2d 691, 693 (2003) ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review,
it must have been raised to and ruled upon by the [circuit court]."). 1

2. We hold the circuit court judge did not err by refusing to recuse himself because
Curry failed to show evidence of bias or prejudice that would warrant recusal. See
Patel v. Patel, 359 S.C. 515, 524, 599 S.E.2d 114, 118 (2004) ("It is not sufficient
for a party seeking disqualification to simply allege bias; the party must show
evidence of bias or prejudice."); Mallet v. Mallet, 323 S.C. 141, 147, 473 S.E.2d
804, 808 (Ct. App. 1996) (finding no evidence in the record "to manifest
impartiality"); id. ("The fact a [circuit court] judge ultimately rules against a
litigant is not proof of prejudice by the judge, even if it is later held the judge
committed error in his rulings."); Patel, 359 S.C. at 524, 599 S.E.2d at 118 (stating
South Carolina appellate courts will not reverse a judge's decision not to disqualify
himself if there was no evidence of judicial prejudice).

AFFIRMED. 2

KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.

1
We express no opinion on the circuit court's application of section 24-27-200.
2
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.