Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-UP-346 - State v. Goffe

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Troy Goffe, Appellant.


Appeal From Aiken County
Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No.  2010-UP-346 
Submitted June 1, 2010 – Filed July 6, 2010


AFFIRMED


Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, 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 Julie M. Thames, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barbara R. Morgan, of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Troy Goffe appeals his convictions for first-degree burglary and possession of tools or other implements capable of being used in crime.  Goffe argues the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury the inference of an intent to commit a crime was permissive.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Rule 20(b), SCRCrimP ("Notwithstanding any request for legal instructions, the parties shall be given the opportunity to object to the giving or failure to give an instruction before the jury retires, but out of the hearing of the jury. . . . Failure to object in accordance with this rule shall constitute a waiver of objection."); State v. Avery, 333 S.C. 284, 296, 509 S.E.2d 476, 483 (1998) (holding when an appellant fails to object to a jury instruction, the issue is not preserved for appeal). 

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.


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