Jones v. State

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
Nakia Jones, Appellant,
v.
State of South Carolina, Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2014-000602
Appeal From Richland County
Robert E. Hood, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-171
Submitted March 1, 2016 – Filed April 6, 2016
AFFIRMED
Nakia Jones, pro se.
Assistant Attorney General James Clayton Mitchell, III,
of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 17-27-20(B) (2014) ("[The Uniform Post-
Conviction Procedure Act (the Act)] takes the place of all other common law,
statutory or other remedies heretofore available for challenging the validity of the
conviction or sentence."); Simpson v. State, 329 S.C. 43, 46, 495 S.E.2d 429, 431
(1998) ("[A] matter which is cognizable under the Act may not be raised by a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus before the circuit or other lower courts.");
Gibson v. State, 329 S.C. 37, 42, 495 S.E.2d 426, 428 (1998) ("[A] petitioner must
allege sufficient facts to show why other remedies, such as [post-conviction relief],
are unavailable or inadequate."); S.C. Code Ann. § 15-53-70 (2005) ("The court
may refuse to render or enter a declaratory judgment or decree when such
judgment or decree, if rendered or entered, would not terminate the uncertainty or
controversy giving rise to the proceeding.").
AFFIRMED.1
SHORT, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.