Lawlis 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

Robert
E. Lawlis, Petitioner,

v.

State
of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Dorchester County

Steven H. John, Trial Judge

 James C. Williams, Jr., Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-301

Submitted May 1, 2009 – Filed June 10, 2009

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, 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 Lance S. Boozer, all of Columbia, for Respondent. 

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 did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to
a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on petitioner's Question I 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).  We deny the petition for a writ of
certiorari as to petitioner's Question II. 

After
a thorough review of the record and counsel's brief, pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) 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., THOMAS, and KONDUROS, JJ.,
concur.

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