State v. Muhammad

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.

Nathaniel
Muhammad, Appellant.

Appeal From Dorchester County

 Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-056

Submitted January 1, 2008 – Filed January
14, 2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Attorney for Capital Appeals 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,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe, Jr., of Summerville, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Nathaniel Muhammad was convicted of five
counts of kidnapping, two counts of armed robbery, and failure to stop for a
blue light.  He was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.  On
appeal, Muhammad alleged the trial court erred by admitting incriminating
statements, which he alleges were given as the result of promises of leniency.  Muhammad did not file a pro se brief. 
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 the appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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