Tate v. State 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. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Jay Walter Tate, Appellant, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent. Appeal From Cherokee County Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-413 Submitted September 1, 2009 – Filed September 2, 2009 AFFIRMED Rodney Wade Richey, of Greenville, for Appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General S. Prentiss Counts, all of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Jay Walter Tate appeals the circuit court's dismissal of his writ of mandamus that requested numerous items from a solicitor and the grand jury foreperson. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Miller v. State, 377 S.C. 99, 101, 659 S.E.2d 492, 493 (2008) ("Mandamus is the highest judicial writ and is issued to compel a public official to perform a ministerial duty, not a discretionary duty, and only when there is a specific right to be enforced, a positive duty to be performed, and no other available legal remedy."); Charleston County Sch. Dist. v. Charleston County Election Comm'n, 336 S.C. 174, 179, 519 S.E.2d 567, 570 (1999) (explaining the decision whether to issue a writ of mandamus lies within the discretion of the trial court, and an appellate court will not overturn the decision unless the trial court has abused its discretion); Willimon v. City of Greenville, 243 S.C. 82, 89, 132 S.E.2d 169, 170 (1963) ("When the legal right is doubtful . . . a writ of mandamus cannot rightfully issue."). AFFIRMED.[1] HEARN, C.J., KONDUROS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.