Raysor 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

Jerry Raysor, Appellant,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Sumter County

 Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-617   

Submitted December 1, 2004 – Filed December 9, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Acting Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, Office, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
Assistant Attorney General J. Hagood Hamilton, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor
Cecil Kelly Jackson, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Jerry Raysor appeals the dismissal of his petition for
writ of habeas corpus.  Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), counsel for Raysor attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved
as counsel, stating he had reviewed the record and concluded Raysor’s appeal
is without legal merit sufficient to warrant a new trial.  Raysor 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]

HUFF, KITTREDGE, and BEATTY, 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 Rule 215,
SCACR.