Heaton v. State, Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-456

• Decision Date: 13 October 2011
• Docket Number: Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-456
• Parties: Thomas Chad Heaton, Respondent, v. State of South Carolina, Petitioner.
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals

Thomas Chad Heaton, Respondent,

v.State of South Carolina, Petitioner.

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-456

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Heard: October 4, 2011

Filed: October 13, 2011

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.

Appeal From Anderson County

John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge

AFFIRMED

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Ricky Keith Harris, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: The State appeals the trial court's order granting post-conviction relief (PCR) to Thomas Heaton. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to the standard of review: Cherry v. State, 300 S.C. 115, 119, 386 S.E.2d 624, 626 (1989) (declaring that on appeal, this court should uphold the PCR court's ruling if it is supported by any evidence of probative value in the record); Solomon v. State, 313 S.C. 526, 529, 443 S.E.2d 540, 542 (1994) (providing if matters of credibility are involved, this court gives deference to the PCR judge's findings because this court lacks the opportunity to directly observe the witnesses); Porter v. State, 368 S.C. 378, 383, 629 S.E.2d 353, 356 (2006) (stating this court gives great deference to the PCR court's findings of fact and conclusions of law).

2. As to the guilty plea: Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242-44 (1969) (noting that generally, a guilty plea must be entered voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently); State v. Lambert, 266 S.C. 574, 580, 225 S.E.2d 340, 342 (1976) (holding the record should reflect that the trial court has assured itself that the plea was voluntary and intelligently entered with full knowledge of the nature of the offense); State v. Ray, 310 S.C. 431, 437, 427 S.E.2d 171, 174 (1993) ("A defendant's knowing and voluntary waiver of a statutory or constitutional right must be established by a complete record; and may be accomplished by colloquy between the court and the defendant, between the court and defendant's counsel, or both."); Pittman v. State, 337 S.C. 597, 599, 524 S.E.2d 623, 624-25 (1999) ("When determining issues relating to guilty pleas, the court will consider the entire record, including the transcript of the guilty plea, and the evidence presented at the PCR hearing."); Anderson v. State, 342 S.C. 54, 57, 535 S.E.2d 649, 651 (2000) (stating the defendant must be aware of (1) the nature and crucial elements of the offense; (2) the maximum and any mandatory minimum penalty; and (3) the constitutional rights being waived); Roddy v. State, 339 S.C. 29, 33, 528 S.E.2d 418, 421 (2000) ("To find a guilty plea is voluntarily and knowingly entered into, the record must establish the defendant had a full understanding of the consequences of his plea and the charges against him."); State v. Rikard, 371 S.C. 295, 301, 638 S.E.2d 72, 75 (Ct. App. 2006) (quoting State v....