Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-645 - State v. Claypoole

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL 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.

Kermit Deaumont Claypoole,        Appellant.


Appeal From Lexington County
Marc H. Westbrook, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-645
Submitted December 1, 2004 – Filed December 21, 2004


APPEAL DISMISSED


Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Kermit Deaumont Claypoole appeals his conviction for four counts of criminal sexual misconduct with a minor, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict.  In his pro se brief, Claypoole argues the trial court erred in admitting DNA testing evidence and in denying his motion for a mistrial based on expert testimony which asserted a legal conclusion.  After a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Claypoole’s pro se brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss Claypoole’s appeal under Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved. [1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., GOOLSBY and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.


[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.