From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. State

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Jun 8, 2016
2016-UP-260 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2016)

Opinion

2016-UP-260

06-08-2016

Michael A. Williams, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2013-000137

Appellate Defender Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General James Clayton Mitchell, III, both of Columbia, for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Submitted February 1, 2016

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Appeal From Richland County John C. Few, Plea Judge James R. Barber, III, Post-Conviction Relief Judge J. Ernest Kinard, Jr., Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Appellate Defender Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General James Clayton Mitchell, III, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Petitioner pled guilty to two counts of armed robbery and two counts of kidnapping, and he received concurrent sentences of eighteen years' imprisonment for each conviction. Petitioner appealed, and this court dismissed the appeal pursuant to Anders v. California. Petitioner filed an application for post-conviction relief (PCR), which was denied and dismissed, and Petitioner did not seek certiorari from the denial. Petitioner filed a second PCR application pursuant to Austin v. State, alleging he was entitled to a belated review of his first PCR application. The second PCR court denied and dismissed Petitioner's second PCR application. Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, which this court granted. This court ordered Petitioner to serve and file the appendix and briefs as provided by Rule 243(j), SCACR.

See State v. Williams, Op. No. 2009-UP-218 (S.C. Ct. App. filed May 20, 2009).

386 U.S. 738 (1967).

As to the belated review of the first PCR court, we find no evidence supported the second PCR court's finding Petitioner knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to seek appellate review of the denial of his first PCR application. Petitioner asserts his plea counsel was ineffective in failing to move to withdraw his guilty plea after he changed his testimony regarding whether he possessed a gun during the armed robberies and kidnappings for which he was convicted. However, Petitioner failed to present this argument to the first PCR court; thus, the issue is unpreserved. See Kolle v. State, 386 S.C. 578, 589, 690 S.E.2d 73, 79 (2010) (holding an argument must be raised to and ruled upon by the PCR court in order to be preserved for appellate review). Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Petitioner's first PCR application.

AFFIRMED.

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

HUFF, A.C.J., and KONDUROS and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Williams v. State

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Jun 8, 2016
2016-UP-260 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2016)
Case details for

Williams v. State

Case Details

Full title:Michael A. Williams, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent…

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Jun 8, 2016

Citations

2016-UP-260 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2016)