George Witt 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

George Witt, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

---

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

---

Appeal From Greenville County
C. Victor Pyle, Trial Judge
John W. Kittredge, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

---

Memorandum Opinion No. 2004-MO-051
Submitted September 14, 2004 - Filed September 23, 2004

---

DISMISSED

---

Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of the S.C. Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth R. McMahon, all 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).

The direct appeal issues are dismissed under Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, after a review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).  Counsel’s motion to be relieved is granted.

DISMISSED.

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