From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cox v. State

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
Nov 27, 2013
Appellate Case No. 2010-155826 (S.C. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2013)

Opinion

Appellate Case No. 2010-155826 Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-445

11-27-2013

Kevin Davonne Cox, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Chief Deputy Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant. Assistant Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, of Columbia, for Respondent.


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.


Appeal From Horry County

Benjamin H. Culbertson, Circuit Court Judge


AFFIRMED

Chief Deputy Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Assistant Attorney General Christina J. Catoe, of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: In this belated direct appeal, Kevin Davonne Cox argues the trial court committed reversible error by allowing testimony about his possession of heroin and marijuana at the time of his arrest. He asserts the testimony was unduly prejudicial because he was on trial for charges relating to his possession of only cocaine. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: See State v. Rogers, 361 S.C. 178, 183, 603 S.E.2d 910, 912 (Ct. App. 2004) ("'It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review.'" (quoting Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998))); see also State v. Bantan, 387 S.C. 412, 418, 692 S.E.2d 201, 204 (Ct. App. 2010) (finding the defendant did not preserve his argument because he declined the trial court's offer to give curative instructions); Cock-N-Bull Steak House, Inc. v. Generali Ins. Co., 321 S.C. 1, 11, 466 S.E.2d 727, 732 (1996) (finding the party's failure to take advantage of court's offer of curative instruction resulted in a waiver of the party's right to complain of error).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, GEATHERS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cox v. State

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
Nov 27, 2013
Appellate Case No. 2010-155826 (S.C. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2013)
Case details for

Cox v. State

Case Details

Full title:Kevin Davonne Cox, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Court:STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Nov 27, 2013

Citations

Appellate Case No. 2010-155826 (S.C. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2013)