State v. Heupel

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.

David Colin Heupel, Appellant.

Appeal from Charleston County

Daniel F. Pieper, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-208

Submitted May 1, 2007 – Filed May 9, 2007

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, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  David Colin Heupel appeals his conviction for murder and assault and battery with intent to kill.  Heupel contends the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of his cocaine use.  His counsel attached a petition to be relieved, stating he reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit.  Additionally, Heupel filed a pro se response brief, contending the trial judge erred in admitting his confession and allowing the State to violate two stipulations.  Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), after a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Heupel’s pro se brief, we dismiss his appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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