State v. Singleton

THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Arthur Lee Singleton, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

J. Ernest Kinard, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-227

Submitted May 1, 2009 – Filed May 27, 2009   

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant
Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe, and Solicitor Warren Blair Giese, all of
Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Arthur
Lee Singleton appeals his guilty pleas to
second-degree burglary and petit larceny, arguing the circuit court’s procedure did not meet the requirements of Boykin
v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  We affirm
pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority: State v.
McKinney, 278 S.C. 107, 108, 292 S.E.2d 598, 599 (1982) (stating that
absent a timely objection at a plea proceeding, the sufficiency of a guilty
plea can be attacked only through the more appropriate channel of
post-conviction relief).

AFFIRMED.[1]

HEARN,
C.J., THOMAS and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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