State v. Haynes

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.

Shawn L. Haynes
a/k/a Vashaun L. Haynes, Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

 Daniel  F.  Pieper, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-564

Submitted October 1, 2008 – Filed October
13, 2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, 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 Solicitor Scarlett A. Wilson, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Shawn Haynes appeals his convictions and sentences for
carjacking, armed robbery, grand larceny, and possession of a firearm during
the commission of a violent crime.  On appeal, Haynes argues the trial court
erred by allowing the State to introduce reply testimony to impeach his
testimony on a collateral matter in violation of State v. Brock, 130 S.C.
252, 126 S.E.2d 28 (1925).  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] Haynes’ appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

ANDERSON, WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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