Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2006-UP-216 - Rhue 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 Court of Appeals

Anthony Joseph Rhue, Petitioner

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent


Appeal From Charleston County
R. Markley Dennis, Jr., Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-216
Submitted March 27, 2006 – Filed April 18, 2006


APPEAL DISMISSED


Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka and Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the grant of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR).

Because there is sufficient evidence to support the PCR judge’s finding that Petitioner was denied his right to direct appeal, we grant certiorari and proceed with a review of the direct appeal issue pursuant to Davis v. State, 288 S.C. 290, 342 S.E.2d 60 (1986).

We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Simpson, 325 S.C. 37, 479 S.E. 2d 57 (1996) (“The granting of a mistrial is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial judge, and his decision will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law.”); and State v. Council, 335 S.C. 1, 515 S.E.2d 508 (1999) (holding a trial court did not err in refusing to grant a mistrial when a SLED agent testified he retrieved appellant’s fingerprint card from SLED records for comparison). 

APPEAL DISMISSED.

BEATTY, SHORT, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.