Crocker v. State ( 2004 )

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

Allen Dale Crocker, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

---

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

---

Appeal From Bamberg County
James C. Williams, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Thomas L. Hughston, Jr., Post Conviction Judge

---

Memorandum Opinion No. 2004-MO-040
Submitted July 2, 2004 - Filed July 26, 2004

---

APPEAL DISMISSED

---

Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Assistant Attorney General J. Hagood Hamilton, Jr., 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).

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 the petition for a writ of certiorari and proceed with a review of the direct appeal issues pursuant to Davis v. State, 288 S.C. 290, 342 S.E.2d 60 (1986).

Counsel for petitioner has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and a petition to be relieved as counsel. Petitioner has filed a pro se response.  After a thorough review of the record pursuant to Anders, supra, we dismiss the appeal and grant the petition to be relieved as counsel.

DISMISSED.

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