Self v. State

• Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Decided: November 8, 2004
• Docket: 2004-MO-059
• Status: Unpublished

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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court

Travis Self, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

---

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

---

Appeal From Florence County
James E. Lockemy, Trial Judge
 B. Hicks Harwell, Jr., Post-Conviction Relief Judge

---

Memorandum Opinion 2004-MO-059
Submitted October 20, 2004 – Filed November 8, 2004

---

AFFIRMED

---

John Wesley Locklair, III, of Joye & Locklair, P.A. of Murrells Inlet, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of the Office of the Attorney General, 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 on petitioner’s Questions I and 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 III 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 convictions and sentences are affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Hornsby, 326 S.C. 121, 484 S.E.2d 869 (1997) (a jury charge is not preserved for appellate review unless a party either requested the charge and obtained a ruling, or objected on specific grounds to the charge as given); State v. Sprouse, 325 S.C. 275, 478 S.E.2d 871 (Ct. App. 1996).

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.