South Carolina Criminal Defense Blog

In Turner v. State, the S.C. Supreme Court reviews when counsel must advise a defendant of the right to appeal, and reverses the PCR judge's grant of a belated appeal based on counsel's failure to advise the petitioner of his right to appeal following a guilty plea.

Following a trial, counsel is required to make certain the defendant is made fully aware of the right to appeal. White v. State, supra. In the absence of an intelligent waiver by the defendant, counsel must either initiate an appeal or comply with the procedure in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Id. However, the standard for a guilty plea differs. Absent extraordinary circumstances, such as when there is reason to think a rational defendant would want to appeal (for example, because there are nonfrivolous grounds for appeal) or when the defendant reasonably demonstrated an interest in appealing, there is no constitutional requirement that a defendant be informed of the right to a direct appeal from a guilty plea. Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000); Weathers v. State, 319 S.C. 59, 459 S.E.2d 838 (1995).

Because there was no finding on the record in the PCR court that petitioner had asked his plea counsel to file a direct appeal, or of other extraordinary circumstances that would require counsel to advise petitioner of his right to appeal from a guilty plea, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing.