Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2010-MO-026 - Mintz 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

Lavon Mintz, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.


ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI


Appeal From Orangeburg County
James C. Williams, Trial Judge
 Perry M. Buckner, Post-Conviction Relief Judge


Memorandum Opinion No. 2010-MO-026
Submitted October 20, 2010 – Filed October 25, 2010                 


DISMISSED


Appellate Defender Katherine H. Hudgins, South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, Division of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Mary S. Williams, all of Columbia, for Respondent.


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

The petition is denied as to petitioner’s Question 2.  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 the petition for a writ of certiorari on petitioner’s Question 1, dispense with further briefing, 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).

Petitioner’s appeal is dismissed, after review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).  Counsel’s motion to be relieved is granted.

DISMISSED.

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