Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2008-UP-313 - State v. Brannon

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.

Ricky Brannon, Appellant.


Appeal From Cherokee County
 Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-313
Submitted June 1, 2008 – Filed June 20, 2008


AFFIRMED


Appellate Defender Lanelle C. Durant, South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, Division of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, 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; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Ricky Brannon appeals his convictions for burglary in the first degree and grand larceny, arguing the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of a footprint analysis expert.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Schumpert, 312 S.C. 502, 507, 435 S.E.2d 859, 862 (1993) (“Unless an objection is made at the time the evidence is offered and a final ruling made, the issue is not preserved for review.”); State v. Wood, 362 S.C. 520, 526, 608 S.E.2d 435, 438 (Ct. App. 2004) (holding a party opposing the admission of evidence must object to the evidence when it is introduced because “a motion in limine is not a final determination”), cert. denied (Aug. 15, 2006); State v. Burton, 326 S.C. 605, 611, 486 S.E.2d 762, 765 (Ct. App. 1997) (“Unless an objection is made at the time the evidence is offered and a final ruling made, the issue is not preserved for review.”).

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.


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