State v. Reddock

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.

Robert Reddock, Appellant.

Appeal From Florence County

 James E. Brogdon, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-445

Submitted July 7, 2004 – Filed August 24, 2004

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 Lewis Clements, III, of Florence,
for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Robert Lee Reddock appeals
his conviction for armed robbery. Reddock argues the trial judge erred in accepting
his guilty plea to the charges because the plea failed to comply with the mandates
set forth in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Reddock’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.  Reddock filed
a separate pro se brief, arguing his conviction was void because
he was not provided a preliminary hearing pursuant to Rule 2, SCRCrimP.

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

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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