Blash 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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Eddie Blash, Jr., Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-001839

Appeal From Florence County
Thomas A. Russo, Resentencing Judge
Paul M. Burch, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-281
Submitted September 1, 2020 – Filed October 7, 2020

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Joanna Katherine Delany, of
Columbia, and Eddie Blash, Jr., pro se, for Petitioner.

Assistant Attorney General Lindsey Ann McCallister, of
Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from the denial of his
application for post-conviction relief (PCR).
Because evidence supports the PCR court's finding Petitioner did not knowingly
and intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on this issue
and proceed with a review of his direct appeal issue pursuant to Davis v. State, 288
S.C. 290, 342 S.E.2d 60 (1986).

On direct appeal, Petitioner argues the plea court erred by admitting his criminal
record from Florida into evidence. However, because this issue was not raised to
the resentencing court, this issue is not preserved for appellate review. See State v.
Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 693-94 (2003) ("In order for an issue
to be preserved for appellate review, it must have been raised to and ruled upon by
the trial judge. Issues not raised and ruled upon in the trial court will not be
considered on appeal."). Accordingly, after consideration of Appellant's pro se
brief and review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we dismiss
Petitioner's direct appeal. Counsel's motion to be relieved is granted.1

APPEAL DISMISSED.

THOMAS, HILL, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.

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