Watts v. State

• Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Decided: October 15, 2014
• Docket: 2014-MO-038
• Status: Unpublished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 Supreme Court

Phillip F. Watts, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2012-213513 Lower Court Case No. 2010-CP-46-03969

Appeal From York County The Honorable Edgar W. Dickson, Circuit Court Judge

Memorandum Opinion No. 2014-MO-038 Submitted October 8, 2014 – Filed October 15, 2014

AFFIRMED

Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Assistant Attorney General James Rutledge Johnson, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR). 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 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 pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Johnson, 363 S.C. 53, 609 S.E.2d 520 (2005) (finding to preserve an issue for review there must be a contemporaneous objection that is ruled on by the lower court); State v. Stroman, 281 S.C. 508, 316 S.E.2d 395 (1984) ("a party cannot complain of an error which his own conduct has induced").

AFFIRMED.

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