State v. Tedder

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.

Roddy Lee Tedder, Appellant.

Appeal From Florence County

 Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-562

Submitted October 3, 2005 – Filed October 24, 2005   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Acting Deputy Chief Attorney Wanda P. Hagler, 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 Edgar L. Clements, III, of Florence, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Roddy Lee Tedder appeals his convictions and concurrent sentences of ten years, ten years, and one year, for burglary second degree, grand larceny, and resisting arrest, respectively. His counsel contends the trial court failed to adequately advise him of the sentencing consequences by neglecting to inform him that the sentences could run concurrently or consecutively.  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[1] Tedder’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J.  and STILWELL and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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