Porter v. SCDC ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • 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
    Darry Lynn Porter, Appellant,
    v.
    South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.
    Appellate Case No. 2011-196868
    Appeal From Greenville County
    D. Garrison Hill, Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-220
    Submitted April 1, 2013 – Filed May 22, 2013
    AFFIRMED
    Darry Porter, pro se.
    Christopher D. Florian, of the South Carolina Department
    of Corrections, of Columbia, for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
    authorities: Rule 29(a), SCRCrimP ("Except for motions for new trials based on
    after-discovered evidence, post-trial motions shall be made within ten (10) days
    after the imposition of the sentence."); State v. Warren, 
    392 S.C. 235
    , 237, 
    708 S.E.2d 234
    , 235 (Ct. App. 2011) ("In criminal cases, the appellate court reviews
    only errors of law and is bound by the factual findings of the trial court unless the
    findings are clearly erroneous."); 
    id. at 240
    , 708 S.E.2d at 236 (holding an inmate's
    motion to reconsider her sentence was untimely because the motion was not filed
    within the ten day limit prescribed by Rule 29, SCRCrimP).
    AFFIRMED.1
    FEW, C.J., and GEATHERS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
    1
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2013-UP-220

Filed Date: 5/22/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/22/2024