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, Appellant,
Crystal McAbee, Respondent.
Appeal From Spartanburg County
Gordon G. Cooper, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-154
Heard February 2, 2008 – Filed March 11, 2008
John Benjamin Aplin, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia; and Karen M. Quimby, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: The State appeals the circuit court’s order finding additional conditions of probation imposed by the Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services (the Department) were invalid and unenforceable because the imposition of conditions would violate the doctrine of separation of powers. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Stevens, 373 S.C. 595, 598, 646 S.E.2d 870, 871-72 (2007) (stating the Department may not add conditions of probation on probationers because it would violate the separation of powers doctrine). We do not address whether the conditions of probation added by the Department qualify as conditions of supervision which enhance the judicially imposed conditions because this issue was not raised at the trial court level. State v. Hamilton, 333 S.C. 642, 648, 511 S.E.2d 94, 96 (Ct. App. 1999) (explaining that an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial court judge to be preserved for appellate review).
HUFF, KITTREDGE, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.