Opinion
Appellate Case No. 2016-002010 Unpublished Opinion No. 2019-UP-133
04-10-2019
The State, Respondent, v. George Holmes, Appellant.
Appellate Defender Lara M. Caudy, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General John Benjamin Aplin, Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Ellis Roberts, and Assistant Attorney General Vann Henry Gunter, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Isaac McDuffie Stone, III, of Bluffton, 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 Beaufort County
Michael G. Nettles, Circuit Court Judge
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Lara M. Caudy, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General John Benjamin Aplin, Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Ellis Roberts, and Assistant Attorney General Vann Henry Gunter, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Isaac McDuffie Stone, III, of Bluffton, for Respondent. PER CURIAM : In this criminal matter, George Holmes appeals the circuit court's denial of Holmes's motion for a directed verdict. Holmes argues the circuit court erred in failing to direct a verdict on the offense of indecent exposure when (1) the alleged exposure occurred in a holding cell at the Beaufort County Detention Center (the Detention Center), which is not a public place as intended under section 16-15-130 of the South Carolina Code (2015); and (2) the circuit court applied the wrong standard of review, and under the correct standard of review, the State failed to present any direct or circumstantial evidence that Holmes willfully or maliciously exposed his person or intended to expose his person. We affirm. 1. We find there is evidence to support the circuit court's finding that the Detention Center jail cell is a public place under section 16-15-130 (A)(1) of the South Carolina Code. See S.C. Code Ann. § 16-15-130 (A)(1) ("It is unlawful for a person to wilfully [sic], maliciously, and indecently expose his person in a public place, on property of others, or to the view of any person on a street or highway."); State v. Zeigler, 364 S.C. 94, 103, 610 S.E.2d 859, 863 (Ct. App. 2005) ("The appellate court may reverse the [circuit court]'s denial of a motion for a directed verdict only if there is no evidence to support the [circuit court]'s ruling."). There is evidence tending to prove the jail cell is a public place because the cell is visible to those who pass by and happen to look through the cell window or the gap in the door. See State v. Williams, 280 S.C. 305, 306, 312 S.E.2d 555, 556 (1984) (including a "place so situated that what passes there can be seen by any considerable number of persons, if they happen to look" in the definition of a public place). Witness testimony indicated the booking area is the busiest part of the Detention Center and a considerable number of people pass through the booking area, including corrections officers, attorneys, maintenance workers, nurses, and anyone being booked. Officer Jessica DeSantis testified she could see into the cell from the booking desk and as she walked past the cell. We affirm the circuit court as to this issue. 2. We find Holmes's argument that the circuit court applied the wrong standard of review is not preserved for our review. The issue was not raised to and ruled upon by the circuit court. See Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("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 [circuit court] to be preserved for appellate review."); State v. Patterson, 324 S.C. 5, 16, 482 S.E.2d 760, 765 (1997) (stating a contemporaneous objection is required to preserve issues for direct appellate review). Therefore, we find this issue is not preserved for our review. AFFIRMED. WILLIAMS, GEATHERS, and HILL, JJ., concur.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.