State v. Tat

Full title: The State, Respondent, v. Paul Ioan Tat, Appellant.

Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Apr 6, 2016

2016-UP-170 (S.C. Ct. App. Apr. 6, 2016)

Opinion

2016-UP-170

04-06-2016

The State, Respondent, v. Paul Ioan Tat, Appellant.

Paul Ioan Tat, pro se. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Susannah Rawl Cole, both of Columbia; and Solicitor William Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Submitted March 1, 2016

Appeal From Pickens County Appellate Case No. 2014-001880 Letitia H. Verdin, Circuit Court Judge

Paul Ioan Tat, pro se.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Susannah Rawl Cole, both of Columbia; and Solicitor William Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Paul Tat appeals his conviction for criminal domestic violence. Tat argues (1) the circuit court erred in affirming his conviction from the magistrate's court and (2) the magistrate's court proceedings violated his right to a fair trial. We affirm¹ pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

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

1. As to whether the circuit court erred in affirming the decision of the magistrate's court: Rule 18(a), SCRMC ("[A] party wishing to appeal [any judgment rendered by the magistrate's court] shall serve on the respondent and file a notice of appeal containing a statement of the grounds for appeal with the magistrate rendering the judgment and with the [c]ircuit [c]ourt of the [c]ounty where the judgment was rendered." (emphasis added)); State v. Johnson, 396 S.C. 182, 186, 720 S.E.2d 516, 518 (Ct. App. 2011) ("In a criminal appeal from the magistrate's court, the circuit court does not review the matter de novo; rather, the court reviews the case for preserved errors raised by appropriate exception."); id. ("The appellate court's review in criminal cases is limited to correcting the order of the circuit court for errors of law.").

2. As to whether the proceedings before the magistrate's court violated Tat's right to a fair trial: State v. Brown, 402 S.C. 119, 125 n.2, 740 S.E.2d 493, 496 n.2 (2013) ("There are four basic requirements to preserving issues at trial for appellate review. The issue must have been (1) raised to and ruled upon by the trial court, (2) raised by the appellant, (3) raised in a timely manner, and (4) raised to the trial court with sufficient specificity.").

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.