UP-285 - State v. Coakley
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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. Pendral Coakley, Appellant. Appellate Case No. 2014-001229 Appeal From Orangeburg County Kristi Lea Harrington, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-285 Submitted March 1, 2016 – Filed June 15, 2016 AFFIRMED Appellate Defender Benjamin John Tripp, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Ellis Roberts, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003) ("In order for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court]. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be considered on appeal."); State v. Passmore, 363 S.C. 568, 584, 611 S.E.2d 273, 281 (Ct. App. 2005) ("Imposing this preservation requirement on the appellant is meant to enable the [trial] court to rule properly after it has considered all relevant facts, law, and arguments." (quoting I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. Pleasant, 338 S.C. 406, 422, 526 S.E.2d 716, 724 (2000))). AFFIRMED.1 HUFF, SHORT, and THOMAS, JJ., concur. 1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
