State v. Thompson

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Respondent,

v.

Edward D. Thompson,       
Appellant,

Appeal From Lexington County

Marc H. Westbrook, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-648

Submitted August 20, 2003 – Filed November
6, 2003   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary,
of Columbia; for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster,
Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Charles H. Richardson, of Columbia, Donald V. Myers, Eleventh Circuit Solicitor’s
Office, of Lexington; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Edward D. Thompson appeals
from his conviction for two counts of armed robbery, criminal conspiracy, assault
of a high and aggravated nature, and two counts of kidnapping, arguing the identification
by a witness at a bond hearing was suggestive and not reliable under the totality
of the circumstances.  Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), Thompson’s counsel attached to the brief a petition to be relieved as
counsel, stating that she had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal
lacks merit.  Thompson filed a separate pro se brief, arguing
the following nine issues:  (1) the jury venire was not a “fair cross section”
of the community; (2) the trial judge erred in allowing the prosecutor to strike
the only African-American from the petit jury; (3) Thompson was not given adequate
notice to be tried in absentia; (4) the trial judge erred in admitting
evidence that prosecution failed to provide for the defense; (5) the trial judge
erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict; (6) the trial judge erred
in failing to charge the jury on the law of accessory before and after the fact;
(7) the trial judge erred in charging the doctrine of “hand of one is hand of
all”; (8) the trial judge lacked authority to hear the case because no written
order existed to “continue appellants [sic] case beyond 180 days”; and
(9) subject matter jurisdiction was lacking because the indictments were not
filed with the clerk of court.

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] Thompson’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., CONNOR and ANDERSON, JJ., concur.

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