MO-014 - Simmons v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

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 Supreme Court Darren A. Simmons, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2013-000204 __________ ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI _________ Appeal From Charleston County The Honorable Roger M Young, Sr., Plea Judge The Honorable R. Markley Dennis, Jr., Post-Conviction Relief Judge Memorandum Opinion No. 2016-MO-014 Submitted March 3, 2016 – Filed April 20, 2016 AFFIRMED Appellate Defender LaNelle Cantey DuRant, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Ashleigh Rayanna Wilson, both of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR). The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied on petitioner's Question 2. Because there is sufficient evidence to support the PCR judge's finding that petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on petitioner's Question 1 and proceed with a review of the direct appeal issue pursuant to Davis v. State, 288 S.C. 290, 342 S.E.2d 60 (1986). Petitioner's convictions and sentences are affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. McKinney, 278 S.C. 107, 292 S.E.2d 598 (1982) (for an issue to be preserved for appellate review, a contemporaneous objection before the plea judge is required); State v. Carriker, 269 S.C. 553, 238 S.E.2d 678 (1977) (an issue is not preserved for appellate review when the defendant failed to object during trial or join in his co-defendant's objections); State v. Rikard, 371 S.C. 295, 638 S.E.2d 72 (Ct. App. 2006) (the phrase on the sentencing sheet "without negotiations or recommendation" means the State and the defendant have not agreed on sentencing, and either party is free to request a favorable sentence). AFFIRMED. PLEICONES, C.J., BEATTY, KITTREDGE, HEARN and FEW, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.