State v. Miller

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.

Nicole Lynn Miller, Defendant,

Kim Reid d/b/a Carolina Bonding Company (as signing agent for: Palmetto Surety Corporation), Surety, Appellant.

Appeal From Greenville County
G. Edward Welmaker, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-284 
Submitted June 1, 2011 Filed June 10, 2011

AFFIRMED

R. Mills Ariail, Jr., of Greenville, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Julie M. Thames, all of Columbia; and Solicitor William W.Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Kim Reid, doing business as Carolina Bonding Company, appeals the trial court's order remitting only $3,500 of its bond upon a finding Nicole Miller failed to appear in court when summoned.  Carolina Bonding Company argues it should have been remitted the full amount of its bond because Miller violated the terms of her bail bond and Carolina Bonding Company substantially performed all required terms of the bonding agreement.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v. McClinton, 369 S.C. 167, 170, 631 S.E.2d 895, 896 (2006) ("An appellate court reviews the [trial] court's ruling on the forfeiture or remission of a bail bond for abuse of discretion."); State v. Workman, 274 S.C. 341, 343, 263 S.E.2d 865, 866 (1980) (In determining whether to remit an estreated bond, the trial court should consider "(1) the purpose of the bond; (2) the nature and willfulness of the default; (3) any prejudice or additional expense resulting to the State"). 

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.