State v. Smith
Decision Date | 11 August 2021 |
Docket Number | 2021-UP-295,Appellate Case 2018-002039 |
Parties | The State, Respondent, v. Filiciano Jermaine Smith, Appellant. |
Court | Court of Appeals of South Carolina |
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.
Submitted June 1, 2021
Appeal From Charleston County Robin B. Stilwell, Circuit Court Judge
Appellate Defender Lara Mary Caudy, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Scott Matthews, both of Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston, all for Respondent.
Filiciano Jermaine Smith appeals his convictions and sentences for first-degree burglary, first-degree criminal sexual conduct kidnapping, and unlawful carrying of a handgun. On appeal Smith argues the trial court erred by denying (1) his motion to suppress evidence seized during his unlawful warrantless arrest and (2) his motion to suppress a black latex glove seized during an unlawful search of his residence. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.
1. We find Smith's warrantless arrest was lawful. Thus, the trial court did not err in denying Smith's motion to suppress evidence that was seized incident to his arrest. See State v. Alston, 422 S.C. 270, 279, 811 S.E.2d 747, 751 (2018) ; id. ; State v. Baccus, 367 S.C. 41, 49, 625 S.E.2d 216, 220 (2006) (); id. ("Probable cause for a warrantless arrest exists when the circumstances within the arresting officer's knowledge are sufficient to lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been committed by the person being arrested."); S.C. Code Ann. § 17-13-30 (2014) ("The sheriffs and deputy sheriffs of this State may arrest without warrant any and all persons who, within their view, violate any of the criminal laws of this State . . . ."); S.C. Code Ann. § 16-23-20 (2015) ( ).
2. Because Smith failed to contemporaneously object when a detective testified he discovered a black latex glove in Smith's residence, we find this issue is not preserved for appellate review. See State v. Moses, 390 S.C 502, 511, 702 S.E.2d 395, 400 (Ct. App. 2010) ...
To continue reading
Request your trial