State v. Upson

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

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.

Charles Upson, Appellant.

Appeal From Aiken County

 Reginald I. Lloyd, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-069

Submitted January 2, 2007 – Filed February 12, 2007   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, for Appellant.

Teresa A. Knox and J. Benjamin Aplin, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Charles Upson appeals the revocation of his probation.  His counsel contends the trial court erred in failing to grant Upson’s motion for directed verdict on the burglary charge, which served as the grounds for the revocation.  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] Upson’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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