State v. Thomason, 3207.

Decision Date26 June 2000
Docket NumberNo. 3207.,3207.
Citation341 S.C. 524,534 S.E.2d 708
CourtSouth Carolina Court of Appeals
PartiesThe STATE, Respondent, v. Randall Keith THOMASON, Appellant.

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of SC Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for appellant.

Attorney General Charles M. Condon, Chief Jonathan E. Ozmint, of State Grand Jury, and Assistant Attorney General Robert E. Bogan, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Holman C. Gossett, of Spartanburg, for respondent.

MOREHEAD, Acting Judge:

Randall Keith Thomason appeals from his guilty plea to trafficking in marijuana, arguing the circuit court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground of double jeopardy. We affirm.

In September 1997, the Greenville County Grand Jury indicted Thomason on one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana for an incident that occurred in Greenville County on October 9, 1996.

On October 16, 1997, the State Grand Jury indicted Thomason on one count of "trafficking in marijuana (conspiracy)" pursuant to S.C.Code Ann. § 44-53-370(e)(1)(b). The indictment charged Thomason with conspiring to transport at least one hundred pounds but less than two thousand pounds of marijuana into the state, from 1989 until the date of the indictment. The indictment alleged the conspiracy took place in Spartanburg, Greenville, Anderson, and Pickens counties.

Thomason pled guilty in the Greenville County Circuit Court on January 20, 1998 to the indictment charging him with possession with intent to distribute marijuana. The circuit court sentenced him to five years in prison, suspended upon three years probation with the condition that he pass all drug tests.

On August 18, 1998, Thomason and his attorney signed a plea agreement regarding the State Grand Jury charge of trafficking in marijuana. The agreement allowed Thomason to plead guilty to trafficking at least ten pounds but less than one hundred pounds of marijuana, rather than the amount charged in the indictment of at least one hundred pounds but less than two thousand pounds of marijuana.

Thomason formally entered a guilty plea in Spartanburg County Circuit Court pursuant to the plea agreement, after unsuccessfully moving to dismiss the indictment based on his claim of double jeopardy. The circuit court accepted Thomason's plea. At a subsequent hearing, the circuit court sentenced Thomason to ten years in prison and fined him $10,000 on this charge.

I.

Thomason appeals, arguing the circuit court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the charge of trafficking in marijuana based on double jeopardy. We conclude Thomason waived any double jeopardy claim by pleading guilty.

A guilty plea generally acts as a waiver of all nonjurisdictional defects and defenses. State v. Munsch, 287 S.C. 313, 338 S.E.2d 329 (1985). The plea admits all elements of the offense charged, "leaves open for review only the sufficiency of the indictment and waives all other defenses." Id. at 314, 338 S.E.2d at 330; cf. United States v. Broce, 488 U.S. 563, 569, 109 S.Ct. 757, 102 L.Ed.2d 927 (1989)

("A plea of guilty and the ensuing conviction comprehend all of the factual and legal elements necessary to sustain a binding, final judgment of guilty and a lawful sentence. Accordingly, when the judgment of conviction upon a guilty plea has become final and the offender seeks to reopen the proceeding, the inquiry is ordinarily confined to whether the underlying plea was both counseled and voluntary. If the answer is in the affirmative then the conviction and the plea, as a general rule, foreclose the collateral attack.").

The State Grand Jury indictment alleged Thomason conspired to traffic in marijuana from 1989 until October 16, 1997, the date of the indictment. The Greenville County Grand Jury indictment alleged that Thomason possessed marijuana with intent to distribute on October 9, 1996. During the plea hearing, Thomason essentially asserted that the trafficking charge and the possession charge arose from the same quantity of marijuana, fourteen pounds. The State, however, argued the trafficking charge alleged an unlawful agreement to commit an unlawful act in four counties, which is separate and distinct from the substantive offense of possession with intent to distribute in Greenville County alone. The State further argued it could establish at trial that Thomason was involved with more than the fourteen pounds purportedly involved in the possession charge.

The circuit court denied Thomason's motion to dismiss the indictment based on the allegation of double jeopardy, noting the indictment charged Thomason with trafficking at least one hundred pounds but less than two thousand pounds of marijuana, and the charge was "legal on its face." Thomason thereafter pled guilty to the trafficking charge based on at least ten pounds but less than one hundred pounds of marijuana as provided in the plea agreement. When the circuit court advised Thomason that by pleading guilty he was waiving his right to the double jeopardy claim and a trial by jury, Thomason stated he understood. The circuit court accepted the plea, finding the "plea to be freely, voluntarily, and certainly thoughtfully and intelligently entered."

By entering a guilty plea, Thomason admitted the circumstances described in the trafficking indictment. The State allowed Thomason to plead to a reduced quantity in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement. Thomason's waiver...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • State v. Tucker
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • January 16, 2008
    ...motion to dismiss. Guilty pleas "generally act as a waiver3 of all non-jurisdictional defects and defenses." State v. Thomason, 341 S.C. 524, 526, 534 S.E.2d 708, 710 (Ct.App.2000) (citing. State v. Munsch, 287 S.C. 313, 338 S.E.2d 329 (1985)). In United States v. Broce Construction Co., In......
  • State v. Sims
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • April 18, 2018
    ...violation appears on the face of the indictment and record. We have followed Broce 's qualification. State v. Thomason , 341 S.C. 524, 528–29, 534 S.E.2d 708 (Ct. App. 2000) (double jeopardy claim not evident from factual allegations of indictment and record waived by guilty plea).Most rece......
  • State v. Green
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • May 4, 2022
    ...warrantless arrest was without probable cause and violated his constitutional rights by pleading guilty); State v. Thomason , 341 S.C. 524, 526, 534 S.E.2d 708, 709 (Ct. App. 2000) (holding defendant waived his double jeopardy claims by pleading guilty). Because Green's guilty plea waived h......
  • State v. Tucker
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • November 15, 2004
    ... ... that Tucker entered a plea of guilty and waived any potential ... claim of self-defense. See State v. Thomason, 341 ... S.C. 524, 534 S.E.2d 708 (Ct. App. 2000) (finding a guilty ... plea admits all elements of the offense charged, leaves open ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT