Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2005-UP-620 - State v. Nalley

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.

Christopher Ryan Nalley, Appellant.


Appeal From Greenville County
C. Victor Pyle, Jr., Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-620
Submitted December 1, 2005 – Filed December 9, 2005


AFFIRMED


Jeffrey Falkner Wilkes, of Greenville, for Appellant. 

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Deborah R. J. Shupe, all of Columbia; Solicitor Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Christopher Nalley appeals his conviction for receiving and having in possession stolen goods valued greater than ten thousand dollars.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v. Carlson, 363 S.C. 586, 595, 611 S.E.2d 283, 287 (Ct. App. 2005) (finding issue not preserved where defendant’s counsel stated he had no objection to admission of evidence); Doe v. S.B.M., 327 S.C. 352, 356, 488 S.E.2d 878, 880 (Ct. App. 1997) (holding that a contemporaneous objection is “required to properly preserve an error for appellate review”); Cogdill v. Watson, 289 S.C. 531, 537, 347 S.E.2d 126, 130 (Ct. App. 1986) (“The failure to make an objection at the time evidence is offered constitutes a waiver of the right to object.”).

AFFIRMED.

STILWELL, KITTREDGE, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.


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