State v. Rhodes

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.

Eugene Lamont Rhodes, Appellant.

Appeal From Williamsburg County

 Howard P. King,
Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion
No. 2007-UP-400

Submitted September
1, 2007 – Filed September 28, 2007   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Aileen P. Clare,
Appellate Defender, of Columbia; for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry
Dargan McMaster,  Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh,  Assistant
Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, of Columbia; and C. Kelly Jackson,
Solicitor, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Eugene Lamont Rhodes
appeals his convictions for possession of crack cocaine with intent to
distribute, and possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute within
proximity of a public park, arguing the trial court erred in not granting his
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 Rhodes’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

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

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