State v. Singleton

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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Arthur Lee Singleton, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Richland County
J. Ernest Kinard, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-227
Submitted May 1, 2009 – Filed May 27, 2009   

---

AFFIRMED

---

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe, and Solicitor Warren Blair Giese, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Arthur Lee Singleton appeals his guilty pleas to second-degree burglary and petit larceny, arguing the circuit court’s procedure did not meet the requirements of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. McKinney, 278 S.C. 107, 108, 292 S.E.2d 598, 599 (1982) (stating that absent a timely objection at a plea proceeding, the sufficiency of a guilty plea can be attacked only through the more appropriate channel of post-conviction relief).

AFFIRMED.[1]

HEARN, C.J., THOMAS and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

---

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