State v. Wilson

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.

Samuel Wilson, Appellant.

Appeal From York County

 Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-478   

Submitted September 15, 2004 – Filed
September 16, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General JohnW. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Appellant was convicted of
possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, possession of crack cocaine
within proximity of a public school, and unlawful child neglect, and he was
sentenced.  The issue briefed by appellate counsel concerns the trial court’s
denial of Appellant’s motion for directed verdict.  Appellant’s counsel has
petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating that he has reviewed the record
and has concluded the appeal is without merit.  Appellant has filed a pro
se brief, which we have considered.   

After a review of the record as required by 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 this appeal and
grant counsel’s petition to be relieved. [1]    

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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