From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Cockrell

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Feb 9, 2022
No. 2022-UP-040 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2022)

Opinion

2022-UP-040 Appellate Case 2020-001070

02-09-2022

The State, Respondent, v. David Dwyer Cockrell, Appellant.

Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Ambree Michele Muller, both of Columbia, for Respondent.


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.

Submitted February 1, 2022

Appeal From Greenville County Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge

Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Ambree Michele Muller, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

David Dwyer Cockrell appeals the amount of restitution ordered by the circuit court following his guilty plea to two counts of uttering a fraudulent check. On appeal, he contends his restitution should only have been the $60 his landlord incurred by attempting to cash the fraudulent checks rather than the amount of the checks-$10,000-plus the $60. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 17-25-322(A) (2014) ("When a defendant is convicted of a crime which has resulted in pecuniary damages or loss to a victim, the court must hold a hearing to determine the amount of restitution due the victim or victims of the defendant's criminal acts. The restitution hearings must be held unless the defendant in open court agrees to the amount due, and in addition to any other sentence which it may impose, the court shall order the defendant make restitution or compensate the victim for any pecuniary damages."); S.C. Code Ann. § 17-25-322(B)(4) (2014) ("In determining the manner, method, or amount of restitution to be ordered, the court may take into consideration . . . (4) any burden or hardship upon the victim as a direct or indirect result of the defendant's criminal acts . . . .").

AFFIRMED.

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

THOMAS, GEATHERS, and VINSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Cockrell

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Feb 9, 2022
No. 2022-UP-040 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2022)
Case details for

State v. Cockrell

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. David Dwyer Cockrell, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Feb 9, 2022

Citations

No. 2022-UP-040 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2022)