Opinion ID: 1255318
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: unified judicial system

Text: Article V, § 1, of the South Carolina Constitution reads as follows: The judicial power shall be vested in a unified judicial system, which shall include a Supreme Court, a Court of Appeals, a Circuit Court, and such other courts of uniform jurisdiction as may be provided for by general law. (Emphasis supplied). Schmitz contends that, with respect to trial of state law offenses, Municipal Courts violate the requirement that all courts be part of a unified judicial system. We disagree. Section 14-25-5, the statute authorizing creation of Municipal Courts, provides in unambiguous language that these Courts are included within the unified judicial system. Subsection (a) permits every municipality to establish a municipal court, which shall be part of the unified judicial system of this State , for the trial and determination of all cases within its jurisdiction. (Emphasis supplied). In light of this clear statement of legislative intent, we hold that Municipal Courts comply with the constitutional mandate that they be part of a unified judicial system. See Kramer v. Dorchester County Council , 277 S.C. 71, 282 S.E. (2d) 850 (1981). Schmitz argues, further, that certain provisions of Act No. 480 violate the mandate for a unified judicial system. These issues, however, were neither presented to nor considered by the Courts below and are not properly before this Court. See Talley v. South Carolina Higher Educ. Tuition Grants Comm. , 289 S.C. 483, 347 S.E. (2d) 99 (1986); State v. Ham , 268 S.C. 340, 233 S.E. (2d) 698 (1977).