State v. Austin

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.

Tawyne Dyonne
Austin, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

  Roger L. Couch, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-447

Submitted August 1, 2008 – Filed August 7,
2008

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender 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, all
of Columbia; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Tawyne Austin appeals her conviction for shoplifting.  She argues
the trial court erred in denying her motion for a directed verdict.  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] Austin’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

KONDUROS, J., CURETON, A.J., and GOOLSBY, A.J.,
concur.

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