Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2008-UP-022 - In the Interest of Eddie S. and Joseph S.
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)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

In the Interest of Eddie S. and Joseph S., both being minors under the age of seventeen, Appellants.


Appeal From Barnwell County
 Barry W. Knobel, Family Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No.  2008-UP-022
Submitted January 2, 2008 – Filed January 10, 2008


APPEAL DISMISSED


Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz III, South Carolina Commission, of Columbia, for Appellants.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barbara R. Morgan, of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Joseph and Eddie S. (the Brothers) appeal their conviction for criminal sexual conduct with a minor.  The Brothers argue the judge erred by allowing the Solicitor to question them regarding their right to remain silent.  The Brothers’ counsel attached a petition to be relieved, stating he reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit.  After a thorough review of the record and counsel’s 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 the Brothers’ appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1] 

APPEAL DISMISSED.

ANDERSON, SHORT AND WILLIAMS JJ., concur.


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