Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2005-UP-093 - Williams v. State

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

Heyward Williams,        Appellant,

v.

State of South Carolina,        Respondent.


Appeal From Richland County
Henry F. Floyd, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-093
Submitted February 1, 2005 – Filed February 8, 2005


APPEAL DISMISSED


Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Assistant Attorney General David E. Spencer, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  In this case involving a petition for writ of habeas corpus, Heyward Williams appeals the circuit court’s order finding the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to convict him of first-degree burglary. He contends there is insufficient evidence to support the finding that the indictment for first-degree burglary was “true billed” by the grand jury.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), counsel for Williams attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel, stating she had reviewed the record and concluded Williams’ appeal is without legal merit sufficient to warrant a new trial.  Williams did not file a separate pro se response.

After a thorough review of the record pursuant to Anders and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED. [1]

ANDERSON and BEATTY, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., 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 Rule 215, SCACR.