Watts v. State

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

Harold Watts, Appellant,

v.

The State, Respondent.

Appeal from Chesterfield County

 J. Michael Baxley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-476

Submitted October 1, 2007 – Filed October
12, 2007   

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and
Assistant Attorney General Christopher L. Newton, all of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Harold
Watts appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.  Watts contends the circuit court erred in allegedly refusing to address the subject matter
jurisdiction claim in his petition.  Watts’ counsel attached a petition to be
relieved, stating she reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks
merit.  Watts did not file a pro se response brief.  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 Watts’ appeal and grant counsel’s motion
to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

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

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