State v. Nealey

THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Curtis Ray Nealey, Appellant.

Appeal From Darlington County

 J. Michael Baxley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-574

Submitted December 1, 2011 – Filed
December 20, 2011   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Senior Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz,
III, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy
Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley
W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor William B. Rogers, Jr., of
Bennettsville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Curtis Ray Nealey appeals
his two convictions for assault and battery with intent to kill, arguing the
circuit court erred in instructing the jury that "inferred malice may also
arise when the deed is done with a deadly weapon."  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] the appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

SHORT, WILLIAMS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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