Opinion
2024-UP-050 Appellate Case 2021-001556
02-07-2024
Shedrick A. Savage, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.
Appellate Defender Lara Mary Caudy, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Senior Assistant Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing and Assistant Attorney General Suzanne J. Shaw, both of Columbia, for Respondent.
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.
Submitted January 1, 2024
Appeal From Spartanburg County H. Steven DeBerry, IV, Circuit Court Judge
Appellate Defender Lara Mary Caudy, of Columbia, for Petitioner.
Senior Assistant Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing and Assistant Attorney General Suzanne J. Shaw, both of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM
Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari from an order of the circuit court denying his application for post-conviction relief (PCR) but finding he was entitled to a belated review of his direct appeal issue pursuant to White v. State, 263 S.C. 110, 208 S.E.2d 35 (1974).
Because there is sufficient evidence to support the PCR court's finding that Petitioner did not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on Petitioner's Question 1 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 certiorari on Petitioner's remaining Question.
Petitioner's pro se Anders brief also raised an additional PCR issue. While we have carefully reviewed the Anders issue Petitioner raised concerning his direct appeal, we have not considered his arguments regarding the PCR question. See Miller v. State, 388 S.C. 347, 347, 697 S.E.2d 527, 527 (2010) ("Since there is no right to 'hybrid representation' that is partially pro se and partially by counsel, substantive documents, with the exception of motions to relieve counsel, filed pro se by a person represented by counsel are not to be accepted unless submitted by counsel.").
After careful review of Petitioner's brief and the record pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we dismiss Petitioner's direct appeal. Counsel's motion to be relieved is granted.
We decide this case without argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
WILLIAMS, C.J., and HEWITT and VERDIN, JJ., concur.