Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-142 - State v. Morman

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State,        Respondent,

v.

James Morman,        Appellant.


Appeal From Spartanburg County
Donald W. Beatty, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No.   2004-UP-142
Submitted December 23, 2003 – Filed March 1, 2004


APPEAL DISMISSED


Senior Assistant Appellate Defender Wanda H. Haile, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H, Richardson, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.


PER CURIAM:  James Levitt Morman appeals his conviction for second degree arson.  Morman’s appellate counsel has petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating he has reviewed the record and has concluded Morman’s appeal is without merit.  The sole issue briefed by counsel concerns whether the circuit court erred in admitting evidence of his alleged prior threats to kill his former wife into evidence at trial.  In a separate pro se brief, Morman argues (1) his appellate counsel erred in failing to argue Morman’s directed verdict was erroneously denied; (2) the Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

After a review of the record as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we hold there are no directly appealable issues that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss Morman’s appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.1

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.


          1  Because oral argument would not aid the court in resolving the issues on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rules 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.