Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-MO-016 - Lewis 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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court

Casey C. Lewis,        Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina,        Respondent.


ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI


Appeal From Williamsburg County
James Brogdon, Trial Judge
Howard P. King, Post-Conviction Relief Judge


Memorandum Opinion No. 2004-MO-016
Submitted March 19, 2004 - Filed April 8, 2004


DISMISSED


Chief Appellate Defender Daniel T. Stacey, of South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Chief Capital and Collateral Litigation Donald J. Zelenka, Assistant Deputy Attorney General B. Allen Bullard, Jr., and Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth R. McMahon, all of Columbia, for Respondent.


PER CURIAM:  Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from an order of the circuit court issued after a hearing on petitioner’s application for post-conviction relief (PCR).

We deny certiorari as to Question 2 of the petition for a writ of certiorari.  However, because there is sufficient evidence to support the PCR judge’s finding that petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari as to Question 1 and proceed with a review of the direct appeal issues pursuant to Davis v. State, 288 S.C. 290, 342 S.E.2d 60 (1986), and White v. State, 263 S.C. 110, 208 S.E.2d 35 (1974).

The direct appeal issues are dismissed under Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, after a review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).  Counsel’s motion to be relieved is granted.

DISMISSED.

TOAL, C.J., WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.  MOORE, J., not participating.