Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-UP-378 - State v. Parker

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.

Roger Raynard Parker, Appellant.


Appeal From Charleston County
 R. Markley Dennis, Jr., Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-378
Submitted May 3, 2010 – Filed August 2, 2010   


AFFIRMED


Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and Senior Assistant Attorney General S. Creighton Waters, of Columbia; Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Roger Raynard Parker appeals the trial court's refusal to charge portions of the Protection of Persons and Property Act (the Act), section 16-11-440 of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2009), in his trial for murder.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Bolin, 381 S.C. 557, 561, 673 S.E.2d 885, 887 (Ct. App. 2009) (concluding the Act was intended to apply prospectively and affirming the refusal to charge when crime occurred four months prior to the effective date); State v. Dickey, 380 S.C. 384, 404-05, 699 S.E.2d 917, 928 (Ct. App. 2008) cert. granted Nov. 10, 2009 (holding the Act was intended to apply prospectively and affirming the refusal to charge when offense took place two years prior to effective date); Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 335 S.C. 598, 613, 518 S.E.2d 591, 598 (1999) (stating an appellate court need not address remaining issues when a decision on a prior issue is dispositive).

AFFIRMED.

KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.


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