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 Elkin Perez, Petitioner, v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2012-212301

Appeal From Greenville County G. Edward Wellmaker, Circuit Court Judge D. Garrison Hill, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-238 Submitted May 1, 2014 – Filed June 25, 2014

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan McCroy Wilson and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Karen Christine Ratigan, both 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 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 otherwise deny the petition for a writ of certiorari.

Petitioner asserts the trial court erred in allowing the jury to hear testimony about prior warrants against him and other testimony about the police officers' familiarity with Petitioner. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority: State v. Carlson, 363 S.C. 586, 595, 611 S.E.2d 283, 287 (Ct. App. 2005) ("A contemporaneous objection is required to preserve issues for direct appellate review.").

AFFIRMED.1 HUFF, THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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