MO-038 - Watts v. State

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 Supreme Court Phillip F. Watts, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2012-213513 Lower Court Case No. 2010-CP-46-03969 Appeal From York County The Honorable Edgar W. Dickson, Circuit Court Judge Memorandum Opinion No. 2014-MO-038 Submitted October 8, 2014 Filed October 15, 2014 AFFIRMED Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Assistant Attorney General James Rutledge Johnson, 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). Petitioner s conviction and sentence are affirmed pursuant to pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Johnson, 363 S.C. 53, 609 S.E.2d 520 (2005) (finding to preserve an issue for review there must be a contemporaneous objection that is ruled on by the lower court); State v. Stroman, 281 S.C. 508, 316 S.E.2d 395 (1984) ("a party cannot complain of an error which his own conduct has induced"). AFFIRMED. TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.

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.