State v. Bell

CourtListener 10137439Scctapp13 feb 2004

Testo completo

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Corlas Lamon Bell, Appellant.

Appeal From Marion County 

James E. Brogdon, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-095

Submitted December 23, 2003 – Filed
February 13, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellant Defender Robert M. Dudek, Office of Appellate
Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant,

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

PER CURIAM:  Bell was convicted of
murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a violent crime,
and he was sentenced.  The issue briefed by counsel concerns whether the trial
court erred in refusing to allow defense counsel to offer evidence that Bell
was originally indicted for two murders and one count of assault and battery
with intent to kill, all three crimes of which arose out of the same incident. 
Specifically, counsel argues the fact that the State nol prossed
two of the three charges against Bell is relevant to the strength of its case. 
Bell’s appellate counsel has petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating that
she has reviewed the record and has concluded Bell’s appeal is without merit. 
Bell has filed a pro se brief, raising the same issue, along with allegations
of error in: admitting testimony, admitting an oral statement made by him, and
denying counsel’s motion for directed verdict.    

After a thorough review of the record 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 hold there are no directly appealable
issues that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss Bell’s appeal
and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved. [1]    

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, J.J., concur. 
 

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

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.