Hampton v. State of South Carolina
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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 Christopher L. Hampton, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2017-002374 Appeal From Spartanburg County Larry B. Hyman, Jr., Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2021-UP-095 Submitted February 1, 2021 – Filed March 24, 2021 APPPEAL DISMISSED Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter and Christopher L. Hampton, pro se, both of Columbia, for Petitioner. Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Megan Harrigan Jameson, of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: On November 5, 2007, Judge Roger L. Couch issued an order on Petitioner's first application for post-conviction relief (PCR). Judge Couch denied Petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims and granted Petitioner's request for a belated direct appeal. No notice of appeal was filed. Petitioner now seeks a writ of certiorari from Judge Larry B. Hyman's October 16, 2017 order, which granted Petitioner a belated review of Judge Couch's order pursuant to Austin v. State, 305 S.C. 453, 409 S.E.2d 395 (1991). Based on the vote of the panel, the court grants the petition for a writ of certiorari from Judge Hyman's order, dispenses with further briefing, and proceeds with an Austin review of Judge Couch's order. After Austin review, the petition for a writ of certiorari as to the ineffective assistance of counsel claim is denied. However, because there is sufficient evidence to support Judge Couch's finding that Petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to a direct appeal, we grant certiorari on the belated direct appeal question 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 Petitioner's pro se briefs and review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Petitioner's direct appeal is dismissed. Counsel's motion to be relieved is granted.1 APPEAL DISMISSED. HUFF, THOMAS, and HEWITT, JJ., concur. 1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
