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
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
Faith Draper, Appellant.
Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-338
Submitted September 1, 2006 – Filed September 21, 2006
Acting Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III , of
Columbia, for Appellant.
John Benjamin Aplin, of
Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Faith Draper appeals the revocation of her probation arguing the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.
In April 2002, Draper pled guilty to grand larceny in
Subsequently, Draper moved to
In December 2002, Draper was again charged with violation of probation. A probation revocation hearing was held on September 17, 2004, in
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The decision to revoke probation is in the discretion of the circuit court judge.
State v. Williamson, 356 S.C. 507, 510, 589 S.E.2d 787, 788 (Ct. App. 2003). This Court’s authority to review such a decision is confined to correcting errors of law unless the lack of legal or evidentiary basis indicates the circuit judge’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.
Draper argues the circuit court was without jurisdiction to revoke her probation pursuant to section 24-21-450 of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2005). We disagree.
This issue is not preserved for our review. Admittedly, “[i]ssues related to
subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time.” State v. Laney,
367 S.C. 639, 649, 627 S.E.2d 726, 732 (2006). However, the issue raised by Draper does not involve subject matter jurisdiction, but rather goes to venue. Subject matter jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong.
Coon v. Coon, 364 S.C. 563, 566, 614 S.E.2d 616, 617 (2005). On the other hand, venue is the place or geographical location of trial and refers to the county where the action should be brought.
Whaley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 362 S.C. 456, 468, 609 S.E.2d 286, 292 (2005). Draper’s argument involves venue because she asserts
This issue also fails on the merits. First, the circuit court had subject matter jurisdiction to hold a probation revocation hearing. See S.C. Const. art. V, § 11 (“The Circuit Court shall be a general trial court with original jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases, except those cases in which exclusive jurisdiction shall be given to inferior courts, and shall have such appellate jurisdiction as provided by law.”).
In addition, venue was proper in
Based on the above, we find the circuit court had jurisdiction to revoke Draper’s probation. The circuit court’s decision is accordingly
ANDERSON, KITTREDGE, and SHORT, JJ., concur.
 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.