State v. Gonzalez

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.

Reynaldo
Gonzalez, Appellant.

Appeal From Anderson County

J. C. Buddy Nicholson, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-405  

Submitted September 1, 2010 – Filed
September 16, 2010

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Salley W. Elliott, Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman Mark Rapoport, of
Columbia; and Solicitor Christina Theos Adams, of Anderson, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Reynaldo Gonzalez appeals his aggregate
sixteen-and-a-half-year sentence for trafficking methamphetamine, conspiracy to
traffic methamphetamine, and possession of crack-cocaine, arguing the trial
court erred in sentencing him
to more than fifteen years' imprisonment when the State retracted a plea offer
for fifteen years' imprisonment before completely complying with his discovery
requests.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following
authorities:  In re M.B.H., 387 S.C. 323, 326, 692 S.E.2d 541, 542 (2010) (stating the
trial court has broad discretion in sentencing within statutory limits and a
sentence will not be overturned absent an abuse of discretion when the ruling
is based on an error of law or factual conclusion lacking evidentiary
support);  S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-375(C)(2)(a) (Supp. 2009) (mandating a
sentence between seven and twenty-five years' imprisonment for trafficking
between twenty-eight and one hundred grams of methamphetamine).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., HUFF and
GEATHERS, JJ., concur. 

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