State v. McKinsey

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.

Marty Craig
McKinsey, Appellant,

Appeal From Marion County

Honorable R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-193

Submitted February 2, 2009 – Filed May 6,
2009   

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, of
Columbia; and Solicitor Edgar Lewis Clements, III, of Florence, for Respondent.

PER
CURIAM:  Marty Craig McKinsey appeals
his murder conviction and life sentence.  He contends the trial court erred in
allowing a witness to testify about passing a polygraph test.  In his pro se
brief McKinsey argues: (1) the trial court erred in failing to provide him an
expert witness; (2) he was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to trial by a
fair and impartial jury because the trial court failed to excuse a juror who
worked with the State's star witness; and (3) he received ineffective
assistance of counsel.  After a thorough
review of the record, counsel's brief, and McKinsey'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 the
appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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