State v. Thompson

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.

Dameon Lamar Thompson, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2015-001029

Appeal From Charleston County
Appeal From Dorchester County
Kristi Lea Harrington, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-245
Submitted May 1, 2017 – Filed June 14, 2017

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Karen
Christine Ratigan, both of Columbia; and Solicitor
Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Dameon L. Thompson appeals the circuit court's denial of his
motion for reconsideration to his sentences on various convictions, arguing the
sentences did not reflect the terms of a plea agreement between himself and the
State. We affirm1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and following authorities:
State v. Smith, 276 S.C. 494, 498, 280 S.E.2d 200, 202 (1981) ("[T]he authority to
change a sentence rests solely and exclusively in the hands of the sentencing judge
within the exercise of his discretion."); Brooks v. State, 325 S.C. 269, 272, 481
S.E.2d 712, 713 (1997) ("A court is not required to accept a plea agreement
reached by the State and the defendant."); Rollison v. State, 346 S.C. 506, 511, 552
S.E.2d 290, 292 (2001) ("All that is required before a plea can be accepted is that
the defendant understand the nature and crucial elements of the charges, the
consequences of the plea, and the constitutional rights he is waiving, and that the
record reflect a factual basis for the plea."); State v. Riddle, 278 S.C. 148, 150, 292
S.E.2d 795, 796 (1982) ("The withdrawal of a guilty plea is generally within the
sound discretion of the trial judge."); id. ("[W]hen the State fulfills its agreement to
recommend a specific sentence, the fact that the judge does not accept the
recommendation does not affect the validity of the plea."); State v. Hicks, 377 S.C.
322, 325, 659 S.E.2d 499, 500 (Ct. App. 2008) ("A judge or other sentencing
authority is to be accorded very wide discretion in determining an appropriate
sentence, and must be permitted to consider any and all information that
reasonably might bear on the proper sentence for the particular defendant, given
the crime committed.").

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS and KONDUROS, JJ., and LEE, A.J., concur.

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