Williams v. State

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 Supreme Court

Alfred Williams,        Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina,        Respondent.

Appeal From Spartanburg County
J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Memorandum Opinion No. 2005-MO-036
Submitted June 13, 2005 - Filed July 18, 2005

AFFIRMED

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General David Spencer, Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Issue 1:  State v. Cheeseboro, 346 S.C. 526, 552 S.E.2d 300 (2001).  Issue 2:  State v. Tucker, 324 S.C. 155, 478 S.E.2d 260 (1996); Cock-N-Bull Steak House, Inc. v. Generali Ins. Co., 321 S.C. 1, 466 S.E.2d 727 (1996)(failure to take advantage of trial judge's offer to give curative instruction constitutes waiver of right to complain of error on appeal); State v. Watts, 321 S.C. 158, 467 S.E.2d 272 (Ct. App. 1996)(in rejecting trial court's offer to strike testimony or give curative instruction, appellant waived any complaint he had to challenged testimony; because the question had already been answered, a motion to strike was necessary to preserve any claim of error on appeal).

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.