Crocker v. State ( 2007 )

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Terry Randall Crocker, Petitioner

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent

---

Appeal From Spartanburg County
Roger L. Couch, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-385
Submitted September 1 2007 – Filed September 21, 2007   

---

DISMISSED

---

Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, South Carolina Commission, of Columbia, Terry Randall Crocker, of Pelzer, for Petitioner.

Assistant Attorney General Molly R. Crum, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the partial grant and partial denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR).[1]

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 on petitioner’s request for belated review of the direct appeal 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). 

On appeal, Crocker’s counsel argues Crocker’s guilty plea was not entered knowingly and voluntarily when he did not demonstrate a knowledge of the law in relation to the facts.  Crocker’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved, stating he reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit.  Crocker also submitted a pro se response brief reiterating counsel’s argument and making additional arguments  Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), after a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Crocker’s pro se brief, we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[2]

DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., and HUFF and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

---

[1]  Crocker argues his plea was not voluntarily made. The PCR judge rejected this argument finding Crocker’s testimony was not credible.  Furthermore, the record from the guilty plea establishes that Crocker entered a free, voluntary, and knowing plea.  Because there is evidence in the record to support the PCR judge’s decision, we deny certiorari on Crocker’s allegation his plea was involuntarily made.  See Caprood v. State, 338 S.C. 103, 109-10, 525 S.E.2d 514, 517 (2000) (explaining that the existence of any evidence is sufficient to uphold the PCR judge’s ruling).

[2] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.