Tate 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

Jay W. Tate, Jr., Appellant,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Cherokee County

 J. Michael Baxley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-352

Submitted May 1, 2005 – Filed May 23, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

Assistant Attorney General Molly Crum, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Jay Walter Tate appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing the circuit court erred in dismissing the petition because the initial trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to convict him of murder and assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature.  Tate filed a separate pro se, presenting virtually identical arguments.  After a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Tate’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 Tate’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

ANDERSON, STILWELL, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

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