Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-416 - State v. Chisolm
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State,        Respondent,

v.

Dansa Chisolm,        Appellant.


Appeal From Dorchester County
Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-416
Submitted April 21, 2004 – Filed June 25, 2004


AFFIRMED


Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Deputy Director for Legal Services Teresa A. Knox, Legal Counsel Tommy Evans, Jr., Legal Counsel J. Benjamin Aplin, and Legal Counsel Lovee M. Watts, South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Dansa Chisolm appeals from an order revoking his community supervision and imposing a one-year term of imprisonment. [1]   He claims the revoking judge failed to comply with the community supervision statute when she revoked his community supervision status and required him to serve a one-year term of incarceration for his willful violation of the conditions of supervision.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR and the following authority: See State v. Hamilton, 333 S.C. 642, 648, 511 S.E.2d 94, 96 (Ct. App. 1999) (challenge to validity of probation revocation must be raised to and ruled on by the revocation judge to be preserved for appellate review).

AFFIRMED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and BEATTY, JJ. concur.


[1]   This case is decided without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.