Opinion
2012-UP-033
01-25-2012
The State, Respondent, v. Richard David Ratliff, Appellant.
Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General William Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.
Unpublished Opinion
Submitted January 3, 2012.
Appeal From Lexington County R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge.
Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General William Blitch, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM
Richard David Ratliff appeals his convictions for three counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor, two counts of lewd act with a minor, and three counts of criminal solicitation of a minor. Ratliff argues the trial court erred in admitting irrelevant and prejudicial character evidence. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Haselden, 353 S.C. 190, 196, 577 S.E.2d 445, 448 (2003) (holding an issue was not preserved for review when the party argued one ground at trial and another on appeal); Wierszewski v. Tokarick, 308 S.C. 441, 444 n.2, 418 S.E.2d 557, 559 n.2 (Ct. App. 1992) ("An issue is not preserved for review merely because the trial court mentions it.").
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
FEW, C.J., and THOMAS and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.