State v. Richardson

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.

Alonzo Richardson,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Newberry County

James W. Johnson, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-101

Submitted February 1, 2005 – Filed February 10, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender
Robert M. Dudek, 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 William Townes Jones,
of Greenwood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Alonzo Richardson appeals from
his conviction for assault and battery with intent to kill, arguing the trial
court erred by trying him in absentia without making findings of fact
prior to trial that (1) he received notice of his right to be present and (2)
he had been warned the trial would proceed in his absence if he failed to attend
court.  Richardson’s counsel attached to the brief a petition to be relieved
as counsel, stating that he had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal
lacks merit. Richardson filed a separate pro se brief, arguing the trial
court (1) lacked subject matter jurisdiction, (2) erred in failing to grant
a directed verdict, and (3) erred in trying him in absentia.  After a
thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Richardson’s pro se
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] Richardson’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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