State v. Laster, 19736
| Decision Date | 05 December 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 19736,19736 |
| Citation | 201 S.E.2d 241,261 S.C. 521 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. James Howard LASTER, Appellant. |
Daniel J. Farnsworth, Greenville, for appellant.
Sol., C. Victor Pyle, Greenville; and Atty. Gen., Daniel R. McLeod, Asst. Attys. Gen., Robert M. Ariail and Stephen T. Savitz, Columbia; and Asst. Sol., William W. Wilkins, Jr., Greenville, for respondent.
James Howard Laster was tried by a jury and found guilty of possessing marihuana, proscribed by § 32--1510.49 of the Code of Laws of South Carolina (Cum.Supp.1971). After the trial, he retained his present counsel for the purpose of this appeal, wherein the propriety of admitting certain tangible evidence is challenged on two separate grounds.
In the brief submitted on Laster's behalf, it is frankly admitted that neither of the issues were submitted to the trial judge; in fact, the record reveals that when the State sought to introduce the now challenged evidence, trial counsel for Laster affirmatively stated, 'I have no objection.' Nevertheless, this Court is requested to consider the questions thus presented, as a matter of grace, and to reverse the conviction.
We have held in numerous decisions that if objections are not interposed to the introduction of evidence during the trial of a case, such questions cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. This well-recognized principle is dispositive of the instant case. For the guidance of the bar, we wish to call attention to the cases collected in 7A South Carolina Digest Criminal Law k 1036(1) (1971).
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Tapp, Opinion No. 4529 (S.C. App. 4/9/2009)
...840; see Govan, 372 S.C. at 557, 643 S.E.2d at 94; State v. Simpson, 325 S.C. 37, 479 S.E.2d 57 (1996); see also State v. Laster, 261 S.C. 521, 521 201 S.E.2d 241, 241 (1973) (pointing out that the South Carolina Supreme Court has repeatedly held that if objections are not interposed to the......
-
State v. Jones, 20375
...was made in the lower court to the testimony in question, such objection cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Laster, 261 S.C. 521, 201 S.E.2d 241. The judgment is accordingly LITTLEJOHN, NESS, RHODES and GREGORY, JJ., concur. ...
-
State v. Davis, 20294
...the introduction of evidence during the trial of a case, such questions cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Laster, 261 S.C. 521, 201 S.E.2d 241 (1973). Appellant next alleges the trial judge erred in refusing to declare a mistrial when a State witness used the term 'mur......
-
State v. Morris, 1739
... ... This Court cannot consider issues raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Laster, 261 S.C. 521, 201 S.E.2d 241 ... (1973). Moreover, we are confined to the record in reviewing a judgment of the circuit court for error. Cartee ... ...