State v. Rolen

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.

Craig Rolen, Appellant.

Appeal From Greenville County

C. Victor Pyle, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-085

Submitted February 1, 2012 -  Filed
February 22, 2012   

AFFIRMED

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

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W.
Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, all of Columbia; and
Solicitor W. Walter Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Craig Rolen appeals the plea judge's order, arguing the plea judge abused
his discretion in denying Rolen's motion to withdraw a guilty plea.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v. Thomason, 355 S.C. 278, 283, 584 S.E.2d 143, 145
(Ct. App. 2003) ("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." (citation and
internal quotation marks omitted)); id. at 283, 584 S.E.2d at 146
("However, once a defendant enters a guilty plea, whether to allow
withdrawal of the plea is left to the sound discretion of the [plea judge]."
(citation omitted)); State v. Riddle, 278 S.C. 148, 150, 292 S.E.2d 795,
796 (1982) (holding a determination the plea was voluntarily entered "will
normally show the [plea] judge did not abuse his discretion" (citation
omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

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

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