Hudson v. State
Hudson v. State
Opinion
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 Bruce Lee Hudson, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2010-165046
Appeal From Richland County Alison Renee Lee, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-086 Submitted January 1, 2013 – Filed February 27, 2013
AFFIRMED
Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Petitioner.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Brian T. Petrano, 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 Question One 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).
After consideration of appellant's pro se brief and review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we dismiss Petitioner's appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.
As to Question Two, after careful consideration, we deny the petition.
AFFIRMED.1 FEW, C.J., and WILLIAMS and PIEPER, JJ., concur.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.