State v. Timmons

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.

Melvin Lamont Timmons Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County
 L. Casey Manning, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-254
Submitted May 1, 2008 Filed May 14, 2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Solicitor Warren B. Giese, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Melvin Lamont Timmons appeals his convictions for criminal sexual conduct in the second degree, kidnapping, armed robbery and possession of a pistol by a person under twenty-one.   Timmons contends his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary.  We dismiss[1] his appeal pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:  State v. McKinney, 278 S.C. 107, 108, 292 S.E.2d 598, 599 (1982) (stating absent a timely objection during guilty plea, the unknowing and involuntary nature of a plea can be attacked only through the avenue of post-conviction relief); State v. Barton, 325 S.C. 522, 530 n.6, 481 S.E.2d 439, 443 n.6 (Ct. App. 1997) (stating any challenge to the knowing and voluntary nature of a guilty plea can be raised only in a petition for post-conviction relief).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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