Warren v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: June 25, 2014
• Docket: 2014-UP-240
• Status: Unpublished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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Robert A. Warren, Jr., Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2010-156146

Appeal From Berkeley County Kristi Lea Harrington, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-240 Heard June 2, 2014 – Filed June 25, 2014

AFFIRMED

Matthew Martin McGuire, of Ervin & McGuire Law Firm, LLC, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Ashleigh Rayanna Wilson, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Robert A. Warren, Jr. challenges the denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR). He argues the PCR court erred by finding his trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance during closing argument. We granted his petition for a writ of certiorari, and now affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Dempsey v. State, 363 S.C. 365, 368, 610 S.E.2d 812, 814 (2005) (stating the appellate court "gives great deference to the [PCR] court's findings of fact"); Sigmon v. State, 403 S.C. 120, 128, 742 S.E.2d 394, 398 (2013) (stating the appellate court will affirm the PCR court's factual finding if any evidence supports that finding); Miller v. State, 379 S.C. 108, 115, 665 S.E.2d 596, 599 (2008) ("In a PCR proceeding, the applicant bears the burden of establishing that he is entitled to relief."); id. ("In order to prove that counsel was ineffective, the PCR applicant must show that: (1) counsel's performance was deficient; and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the result of the trial would have been different." (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984))); Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1, 5-6 (2003) ("The right to effective assistance extends to closing arguments. Nonetheless, counsel has wide latitude in deciding how best to represent a client, and deference to counsel's tactical decisions in his closing presentation is particularly important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategy at that stage." (internal citations omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and SHORT and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.