City of Columba v. Lin Haiyan

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

City of
Columbia, Respondent,

v.

Haiyan Lin, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.   2010-UP-271

Submitted March 1, 2010 – Filed May 14,
2010

AFFIRMED

Haiyan Lin, pro se, for Appellant.

Dana Marie Thye, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Haiyan
Lin, pled guilty to several property code violations and the municipal court
imposed six thirty-day suspended sentences totaling 180 days.  After finding
Lin failed to comply with the conditions of suspension regarding three of the
sentences, the municipal court imposed ninety days jail time.  Lin now appeals
the circuit court's decision affirming the municipal court.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to whether the circuit court erred in relying on the municipal
court's order finding Lin failed to make substantial progress: Wilder Corp.
v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("[A]n
issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised
to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate
review.").

2. As to whether the circuit
court erred in finding the municipal court had jurisdiction:  S.C. Code Ann. §
14-25-45 (Supp. 2009) (providing that municipal courts have jurisdiction to
hear "all cases arising under the ordinances of the municipality for which
established").   

3. This
court need not address Lin's remaining issues because they are manifestly
without merit.  Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR (stating
that a point that is manifestly without merit need not be addressed).

AFFIRMED.

FEW,
C.J., SHORT, and LOCKEMY, JJ.,
concur.

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