State v. Williams

CourtListener 10153955Scctapp12 avr. 2011

Texte intégral

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.

Marvin L.
Williams, Appellant.

Appeal From Colleton County

 Perry M. Buckner, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-150

Submitted April 1, 2011 – Filed April 12,
2011   

AFFIRMED

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

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General
John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and
Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., of Columbia; and Solicitor
I. McDuffie Stone, III, of Bluffton, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Marvin L.
Williams pled guilty to two counts of assault and battery with intent to kill,
one count of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature, seven counts
of assault with intent to kill, two counts of possession of a weapon during a
violent crime, and one count of pointing and presenting a firearm.  On appeal,
Williams argues the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request
for a continuance.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1),
SCACR, and the following authorities: State
v. McKennedy, 348 S.C. 270, 280, 559
S.E.2d 850, 855 (2002) (holding "guilty pleas act as a waiver of all non-jurisdictional defects and defenses" and finding the defendant waived his right to appeal the trial court's
denial of his motion for a continuance because he pled guilty to the charge); State
v. Thomason, 341 S.C. 524, 526, 534 S.E.2d 708, 710 (Ct. App. 2000) ("A guilty plea generally acts as a waiver of all non-jurisdictional defects and defenses. The plea admits all elements of the
offense charged, leaves open for review only the sufficiency of the indictment
and waives all other defenses.") (internal
citation and quotation marks omitted). 

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS,
GEATHERS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.