Pryor, Sr. v. State of South Carolina

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

Roland
Pryor, Sr.,                                                Petitioner,

v.

State
of South Carolina,                                      Respondent.

Appeal From Aiken County

James R. Barber, III, Plea Judge

D.
Garrison Hill, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-534

Submitted November 2, 2009 – Filed November 19, 2009

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy
Attorney John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
and Assistant Attorney General Mary
S. Williams, all of Columbia, for
Respondent. 

PER CURIAM:  This matter is
before the Court on a petition for a writ of certiorari following the dismissal
of Petitioner's application for post-conviction relief (PCR) and the granting of a belated
appeal of Petitioner’s guilty plea to criminal sexual conduct with a minor in
the second degree.  On the direct appeal issue, counsel has submitted a brief
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting petitioner’s plea was not
voluntarily and knowingly made.  Counsel attached to the brief a petition to be
relieved, stating that she had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal
lacks merit.  Petitioner did not file a separate pro se brief.    

Because evidence
supports 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) and White
v. State, 263 S.C. 110, 208 S.E.2d 35
(1974).

After a thorough review of
the record and counsel's brief, pursuant to Anders and State v.
Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss Petitioner’s
appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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