Lucas v. State

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedDecember 10, 2014
Docket2014-MO-047
StatusUnpublished

This text of Lucas v. State (Lucas v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lucas v. State, (S.C. 2014).

Opinion

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

Jeffery T. Lucas, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2013-000455 Lower Court Case No. 2010-CP-32-00803

Appeal From Lexington County William P. Keesley, Trial Judge Clifton Newman, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Memorandum Opinion No. 2014-MO-047 Submitted November 19, 2014 – Filed December 10, 2014

AFFIRMED

Tommy Arthur Thomas, of Irmo, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General John Walter Whitmire, all of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR). We deny the petition on petitioner's Question II.

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 on petitioner's Question I, 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 conviction and sentence are affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Freiburger, 366 S.C. 125, 620 S.E.2d 737 (2005) (an argument not raised to and ruled on by the trial judge is not preserved for appellate review); State v. Green, 397 S.C. 268, 724 S.E.2d 664 (2012); State v. Johnson, 338 S.C. 114, 525 S.E.2d 519 (2000); State v. Kornahrens, 290 S.C. 281, 350 S.E.2d 180 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 940 (1987); State v. Middleton, 288 S.C. 21, 339 S.E.2d 692 (1986), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 872 (1988).

AFFIRMED.

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Freiburger
620 S.E.2d 737 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2005)
State v. Middleton
339 S.E.2d 692 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1986)
State v. Johnson
525 S.E.2d 519 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2000)
State v. Kornahrens
350 S.E.2d 180 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1986)
Davis v. State
342 S.E.2d 60 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1986)
State v. Green
724 S.E.2d 664 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lucas v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lucas-v-state-sc-2014.