State v. Neal

Supreme Court of South Carolina

State v. Neal

226 S.E.2d 236, 267 S.C. 53, 1975 S.C. LEXIS 213

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedDecember 8, 1975

Docket75-22

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 226 S.E.2d 236 (State v. Neal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court 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. Neal, 226 S.E.2d 236, 267 S.C. 53, 1975 S.C. LEXIS 213 (S.C. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

On October 22, 1974, the appellant, represented by counsel, entered guilty pleas to two indictments charging drug violations, and was sentenced, in the aggregate, to 30 months, suspended upon service of four months and four years probation. On November 2, 1974, appellant made a motion, through other counsel, to be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea. The motion was denied by the lower court.

A motion to withdraw a guilty plea is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge before whom the plea was entered. State v. Cantrell, 250 S. C. 376, 158 S. E. [54]*54(2d) 189 (1967). The trial judge found that the guilty pleas were intelligently and voluntarily made, which finding is supported by the record. We find no abuse in the exercise of his discretion.

The judgment of the lower court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 23 of the Rules of this Court.

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

Per Curiam:

On October 22, 1974, the appellant, represented by counsel, entered guilty pleas to two indictments charging drug violations, and was sentenced, in the aggregate, to 30 months, suspended upon service of four months and four years probation. On November 2, 1974, appellant made a motion, through other counsel, to be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea. The motion was denied by the lower court.

A motion to withdraw a guilty plea is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge before whom the plea was entered. State v. Cantrell, 250 S. C. 376, 158 S. E. [54]*54(2d) 189 (1967). The trial judge found that the guilty pleas were intelligently and voluntarily made, which finding is supported by the record. We find no abuse in the exercise of his discretion.

The judgment of the lower court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 23 of the Rules of this Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 S.E.2d 236, 267 S.C. 53, 1975 S.C. LEXIS 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-neal-sc-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack