State v. Albert Ashby

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. Albert Ashby, Appellant. Appeal from Orangeburg County Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-106 Submitted January 4, 2010 – Filed February 8, 2010 AFFIRMED Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of Columbia, for Appellant. Assistant Chief Legal Counsel J. Benjamin Aplin, of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Albert Ashby appeals the revocation of his probation, arguing the circuit court erred in failing to make a finding that his probation violations were willful. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Bryant, 383 S.C. 410, 418, 680 S.E.2d 11, 15 (Ct. App. 2009) (holding the failure to raise the issue of willfulness at a probation revocation hearing renders the issue not preserved for appellate review); State v. Hamilton, 333 S.C. 642, 649, 511 S.E.2d 94, 97 (Ct. App. 1999) (holding no finding of willfulness is necessary where conditions of probation other than failure to pay were violated); State v. Allen, 370 S.C. 88, 102, 634 S.E.2d 653, 660 (2006) (when the trial court's revocation decision is upheld on one ground, it ordinarily is immaterial whether probation was properly revoked on other grounds unless the entire proceeding was tainted by a given error). AFFIRMED. WILLIAMS, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.