Wilson v. State of SC

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

James A. Wilson, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001432

Appeal From Horry County

Steven H. John, Circuit Court Judge Larry B. Hyman, Jr., Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2021-UP-008 Submitted November 1, 2020 – Filed January 13, 2021

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Taylor Davis Gilliam, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Scott Matthews, of Columbia, for Respondent.

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

Because the circumstances of this case support the PCR court's finding that Petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on Petitioner's Question One and proceed with a review of the direct appeal issue pursuant to Davis v. State, 288 S.C. 396, 660 S.E.2d 512 (2008).

On direct appeal, Petitioner argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict on the murder charge against him. After review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and consideration of Petitioner's pro se responses, we dismiss Petitioner's direct appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and KONDUROS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.