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 Supreme Court

Eric D. Tessner, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2009-143986

Appeal From Florence County Michael G. Nettles, Trial Judge Thomas A. Russo, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

Memorandum Opinion No. 2012-MO-021 Submitted May 23, 2012 – Filed June 6, 2012

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, Division of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General David Spencer, 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.

Petitioner's convictions and sentences are affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (1978); State v. Wright, 391 S.C. 436, 706 S.E.2d 324 (2011).

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.