State v. Mathia L. Chambers ( 2024 )


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
    The State, Respondent,
    v.
    Mathia Lamont Chambers, Appellant.
    Appellate Case No. 2022-000689
    Appeal From Lexington County
    Walton J. McLeod, IV, Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2024-UP-387
    Submitted November 1, 2024 – Filed November 20, 2024
    AFFIRMED
    Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of
    Columbia, for Appellant.
    Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior
    Assistant Deputy Attorney General Mark Reynolds
    Farthing, both of Columbia, for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: Mathia Lamont Chambers appeals his conviction for voluntary
    manslaughter and sentence of thirty years' imprisonment. On appeal, Chambers
    argues the plea court erred in refusing to award credit for time served on monitored
    house arrest. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.
    We hold the plea court did not abuse its discretion in denying Chambers's motion
    to reconsider and refusing to credit him with any time served while on monitored
    house arrest because the plea court was not required to award such credit under the
    statute. See State v. Pogue, 
    430 S.C. 384
    , 386, 
    844 S.E.2d 397
    , 398 (Ct. App.
    2020) ("A sentence will not be overturned absent an abuse of discretion . . . ."
    (quoting In re M.B.H., 
    387 S.C. 323
    , 326, 
    692 S.E.2d 541
    , 542 (2010))); State v.
    King, 
    367 S.C. 131
    , 136, 
    623 S.E.2d 865
    , 868 (Ct. App. 2005) ("An abuse of
    discretion occurs when the decision by the [plea court] is based on an error of
    law."); 
    S.C. Code Ann. § 24-13-40
     (Supp. 2021) ("In every case in computing the
    time served by a prisoner, full credit against the sentence must be given for time
    served prior to trial and sentencing, and may be given for any time spent under
    monitored house arrest." (emphasis added)).
    AFFIRMED. 1
    WILLIAMS, C.J., and MCDONALD and TURNER, JJ., concur.
    1
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2024-UP-387

Filed Date: 11/20/2024

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/20/2024