History
  • No items yet
midpage
Loftin v. State
278 S.C. 376
S.C.
1982
Check Treatment
Per Curiam:

Appellant was convicted of forgery and was sentenced to six years’ confinement, to run consecutively with prior sentences. He now appeals the denial, after a hearing, of his Post-Conviction Relief application.

Although the post-conviction judge denied appellant’s application, he found appellant had been denied his right to appeal. Accordingly, this case arises from the belated appeal procedures provided by White v. State, 263 S. C. 110, 208 S. E. (2d) 35 (1974) and McCray v. State, 271 S. C. 185, 246 S. E. (2d) 230 (1978).

Appellant alleges the trial court erred in sentencing him when it considered a prior conviction which was later reversed by this Court. See State v. Loftin, 276 S. C. 48, 275 S. E. (2d) 575 (1981). This issue is not a trial issue which falls under the review procedures of White and McCray, but is one which should have been raised during post-conviction proceedings. See S. C. Code Ann. § 17-27-20 (1976). Because appellant failed to do so, the issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Goolsby, 275 S. C. 110, 268 S. E. (2d) 31 (1980), cert. denied 449 U. S. 1037, 101 S. Ct. 616, 66 S. Ct. 500 (1980); Murphy v. Hagan, 275 S. C. 334, 271 S. E. (2d) 311 (1980).

The remaining issue submitted in this appeal is without merit and affirmed pursuant to Rule 23 of the Rules of Practice of this Court.

Affirmed.

Harwell, J., not participating.

Case Details

Case Name: Loftin v. State
Court Name: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Date Published: Oct 19, 1982
Citation: 278 S.C. 376
Docket Number: 21800
Court Abbreviation: S.C.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.