Singleton v. State

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 Court of Appeals

Paul Singleton, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Appeal from Georgetown County

J. Michael Baxley, Circuit Court Judge

Paula H. Thomas, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-269

Submitted April 1, 2008 – Filed May 19, 2008

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate
Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, and Paul D. Singleton, of Ridgeville,
for Petitioner.

Attorney
General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney John W. McIntosh, Assistant
Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General

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 is
entitled to a belated appeal, we grant the petition for a writ of 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 appeal
is dismissed[1],
after consideration of Petitioner’s pro se brief and review pursuant to Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).  Counsel’s motion to be relieved is
granted.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

HUFF,
KITTREDGE, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

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