State v. Clark

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.

Marco Andrea
Clark, Appellant.

Appeal From Clarendon County

Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2012-UP-055 

Submitted January 3, 2012 – Filed February
1, 2012

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, 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 William M. Blitch, Jr., all of
Columbia; and Solicitor Ernest A. Finney, III, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Marco
Andrea Clark appeals his convictions for armed robbery and possession of a
weapon during the commission of a violent crime.  He argues the trial court
erred in denying his motion for funds to hire an expert to determine whether
Clark lacked the capacity to distinguish moral or legal right from moral or
legal wrong at the time of the crime.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Rivers v. Strickland, 264 S.C. 121, 124, 213 S.E.2d 97, 98 (1975) ("The general rule
is that a plea of guilty, voluntarily and understandingly made, constitutes a
waiver of nonjurisdictional defects and defenses, including claims of violation
of constitutional rights prior to the plea.").

AFFIRMED.

SHORT,
WILLIAMS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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