Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2005-UP-359 - State v. Benson
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

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)(1), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals


The State, Respondent,

v.

Willie Tonette Benson and Matthew Dustin Perry, Appellants.


Appeal From Charleston County
Daniel F. Pieper, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-359
Submitted May 1, 2005 – Filed May 23, 2005  


APPEAL DISMISSED


Acting Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, of Columbia; and Solicitor Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Willie T. Benson and Matthew D. Perry appeal from their convictions for murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, and conspiracy arguing the trial judge erred by refusing to grant a mistrial after one of the jurors revealed that he had discussed with his fellow jurors the fact that he had attended a gun class taught by the victim.  Counsel for Benson and Perry attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel, stating he had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit.  Both Benson and Perry filed extensive pro se briefs.    After a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Appellants’ pro se briefs 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[1] the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., and BEATTY and SHORT, JJ., concur.


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