State v. Hullett

CourtListener 10137596Scctapp15 avr. 2004

Texte intégral

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.

Phillip Thomas Hullett,       
Appellant.

Appeal From York County

Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-245

Submitted February 23, 2004 – Filed April 15, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Senior Assistant Appellate Defender Wanda H. Haile, Office
of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Phillip Thomas Hullett appeals
the circuit court’s denial of his request for a bond pending appeal of his conviction
for a trafficking powder cocaine, distribution of marijuana, possession of marijuana
with intent to distribute, and distribution of marijuana.  Hullett’s appellate
counsel has petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating she has reviewed the
record and concluded Hullett’s appeal is without merit.  The sole issue briefed
by counsel argues the circuit court erred in finding it lacked jurisdiction
to hear Hullett’s bond request.  In a separate pro se response brief,
Hullett argues the circuit court erred in denying his motion to suppress drug
evidence.

After a review of the record as required by Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C.
116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we hold there are no directly appealable issues
that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss Todd’s appeal and
grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.1

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

         
1  Because oral argument would not aid the court in resolving
the issues on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rules 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.