State v. Crim

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. Crim

DecidedAugust 12, 2020

Docket2018-001915

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Crim (State v. Crim) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Crim, (S.C. Ct. App. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

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.

Daemon Michael Crim, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001915

Appeal From Dorchester County Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-239 Submitted June 1, 2020 – Filed August 12, 2020

AFFIRMED

Erin E. Bailey, of The Law Office of Erin E. Bailey LLC, of Georgetown, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Joshua Abraham Edwards, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Daemon Crim appeals his concurrent twenty-year sentences and requirement he register as a sex offender following his guilty plea for two counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC). Because the plea court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Crim's sentence that was within the statutory range, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: In re M.B.H., 387 S.C. 323, 326, 692 S.E.2d 541, 542 (2010) ("A [plea court] has broad discretion in sentencing within statutory limits."); id. (holding a sentence will not be overturned absent an abuse of discretion and explaining an abuse of discretion occurs "when the ruling is based on an error of law or a factual conclusion without evidentiary support"); S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-653(2) (2015) ("[CSC] in the second degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than twenty years according to the discretion of the court."); S.C. Code Ann. § 23- 3-430(C)(2) (Supp. 2019) (explaining that an individual convicted of second degree CSC shall be required to register as a sex offender).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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.

Daemon Michael Crim, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001915

Appeal From Dorchester County Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-239 Submitted June 1, 2020 – Filed August 12, 2020

AFFIRMED

Erin E. Bailey, of The Law Office of Erin E. Bailey LLC, of Georgetown, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Joshua Abraham Edwards, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Daemon Crim appeals his concurrent twenty-year sentences and requirement he register as a sex offender following his guilty plea for two counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC). Because the plea court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Crim's sentence that was within the statutory range, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: In re M.B.H., 387 S.C. 323, 326, 692 S.E.2d 541, 542 (2010) ("A [plea court] has broad discretion in sentencing within statutory limits."); id. (holding a sentence will not be overturned absent an abuse of discretion and explaining an abuse of discretion occurs "when the ruling is based on an error of law or a factual conclusion without evidentiary support"); S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-653(2) (2015) ("[CSC] in the second degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than twenty years according to the discretion of the court."); S.C. Code Ann. § 23- 3-430(C)(2) (Supp. 2019) (explaining that an individual convicted of second degree CSC shall be required to register as a sex offender).

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Crim, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-crim-scctapp-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack