Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-MO-023 - Shannon 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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court

Dominique J. Shannon, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.


ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI


Appeal From Florence County
John M. Milling, Plea JudgeMichael G. Nettles, Post-Conviction Judge


Memorandum Opinion No.  2010-MO-023
Submitted September 23, 2010 – Filed September 27, 2010


AFFIRMED


Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliot, and Assistant Attorney General Julie M. Thames, all of the Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, for Respondent.


PER CURIAM:  Petitioner pled guilty to trafficking in cocaine, between 28 and 100 grams, second offense.  No direct appeal was taken, but an application for post-conviction relief (PCR) was filed.  After a hearing, the circuit court denied relief, and counsel for petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari and a motion to be relieved as counsel pursuant to Johnson v. State, 294 S.C. 310, 364 S.E.2d 201 (1988).  The motion to relieve counsel was denied, and the Court ordered the parties to address whether the circuit court erred in finding petitioner was not entitled to a belated review of his direct appeal issue.

Subsequently, the Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari, dispensed with further briefing, and ordered the parties to brief the direct appeal issue set forth in the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to White v. State, 263 S.C. 110, 208 S.E.2d 35 (1974), and Rule 243(i)(2), SCACR.       

Counsel for petitioner has now filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and a petition to be relieved as counsel.  Petitioner has filed a pro se response.  After a thorough review of the issue set forth in the Anders brief, petitioner's pro se response, and the record, we find no issues of merit.  Accordingly, petitioner's conviction and sentence are affirmed and counsel's motion to be relieved is granted.

AFFIRMED. 

TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.