State v. Ballenger

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.

Thomas Lee Ballenger, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County
J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-539  
Submitted November 1, 2011 Filed December 5, 2011

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barry J. Barnette, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Thomas Lee Ballenger appeals his conviction for criminal domestic violence, arguing the trial court erred in overruling his objection to the State's eliciting improper character evidence during his trial.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Nichols, 325 S.C. 111, 120, 481 S.E.2d 118, 123 (1997) (holding an issue not preserved for review when a party made only a general objection at trial, without giving a specific ground); State v. Bailey, 253 S.C. 304, 310, 170 S.E.2d 376, 379 (1969) ("It is well settled that an objection, to be good, must point out the specific ground of the objection, and that if it does not do so, no error is committed in overruling it." (quotation marks and citations omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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