Robert A. Baker v. State

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

Robert A. Baker, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001854

Appeal From Lexington County
J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2023-UP-120
Submitted January 1, 2023 – Filed March 22, 2023

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Sarah Elizabeth Shipe, of Columbia,
for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant
Attorney General Lillian Loch Meadows, both of
Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Robert A. Baker appeals the post-conviction relief (PCR) court's
order dismissing his PCR application after it found he had failed to prosecute his
application. Baker argues the PCR court erred in dismissing his application
because it contained well-defined allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel,
which noticed the State on what allegations he planned to pursue. We hold Baker's
application for PCR was not timely filed because it was not filed within one year of
the date he pled guilty to the underlying convictions. See Rule 220(c), SCACR
("The appellate court may affirm any ruling, order, decision, or judgment upon any
ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal."); S.C. Code Ann. § 17-27-45(A)
(2014) (requiring a PCR applicant file an application for relief within one year
after the entry of judgement on the convictions in question or within one year after
an appellate court sends the remittitur to the lower court if the convictions are
appealed).
AFFIRMED. 1

WILLIAMS, C.J., THOMAS, J., and LOCKEMY, A.J., concur.

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