CourtListener 10155942•State v. Shine
Gesamter Gesetzestext
THIS OPINION HAS NO
PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY
PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
v.
Michael Shine, Appellant.
Appeal From Charleston County
Thomas W. Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-444
Submitted September 1,2009 Filed October
2, 2009
APPEAL DISMISSED
Chief Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for
Appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J.
Zelenka, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston,
for Respondent.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Shine appeals his convictions for murder, kidnapping, first-degree
burglary, and robbery, arguing the trial
judge erred in failing to instruct the jury on the law of accessory after the
fact. Shine also filed a pro
se brief. After a thorough review of the record and 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 counsels motion to be relieved.
APPEAL
DISMISSED.
Short, Williams,
and Geathers, J.J., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215, SCACR.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.