From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Goodwin

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Feb 29, 2012
2012-UP-124 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2012)

Opinion

2012-UP-124

02-29-2012

The State, Respondent, v. Willie Goodwin, Appellant.

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, and Solicitor Daniel E. Johnson, all of Columbia, for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Submitted February 1, 2012

Appeal From Richland County, J. Michelle Childs, Circuit Court Judge

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Mark R. Farthing, and Solicitor Daniel E. Johnson, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Willie Goodwin appeals his sentence for five counts of distribution of marijuana, third offense, and one count of failure to stop for a blue light, arguing the plea judge erred in refusing to reconsider the sentence imposed after Goodwin's guilty plea. Specifically, Goodwin argues the plea judge improperly considered inaccurate and prejudicial remarks made by the State during sentencing. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Hicks, 377 S.C. 322, 325, 659 S.E.2d 499, 500 (Ct. App. 2008) ("A judge or other sentencing authority is to be accorded very wide discretion in determining an appropriate sentence, and must be permitted to consider any and all information that reasonably might bear on the proper sentence for the particular defendant, given the crime committed."); State v. Barton, 325 S.C. 522, 531, 481 S.E.2d 439, 444 (Ct. App. 1997) ("Absent partiality, prejudice, oppression, or corrupt motive, this [c]ourt lacks jurisdiction to disturb a sentence that is within the limit prescribed by statute.").

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

AFFIRMED.

PIEPER, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Goodwin

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Feb 29, 2012
2012-UP-124 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2012)
Case details for

State v. Goodwin

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. Willie Goodwin, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Feb 29, 2012

Citations

2012-UP-124 (S.C. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2012)