CourtListener 10154976•Husk v. State
Full text
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
Johnny R. Husk, Petitioner
v.
State of South Carolina, Respondent
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
Appeal From Aiken County
Reginald L. Lloyd, Trial Judge
Doyet A. Early, III, Post-Conviction
Relief Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-265
Submitted April 1, 2008 Filed May 16,
2008
APPEAL DISMISSED
Deputy Chief Attorney Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia; Johnny R. Husk,
of Ridgeland; for Petitioner.
Assistant Attorney General Ashley McMahan, of Columbia, for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Petitioner
seeks a writ of certiorari from the denial of his application for
post-conviction relief (PCR). The State does not object to the PCR judges
finding that petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to
a direct appeal. Accordingly, 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).
Petitioners appeal is dismissed,[1] after consideration of his pro se brief, counsels brief, and
review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsels
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.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.