State v. Cheatham

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.

Lionel M. Cheatham, Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

  Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2005-UP-389

Submitted June 1, 2005 – Filed June 14, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Asst. Attorney General W. Rutledge Martin, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Lionel M. Cheatham appeals the circuit court’s refusal to grant a new trial following his conviction for first-degree burglary.  Cheatham’s sole argument on appeal contends the out-of-court identification of him made from a photographic lineup was “unduly suggestive, and the resulting in-court identification was unreliable and therefore inadmissible.”  Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Cheatham’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved as counsel to the final brief, stating she reviewed the record and concluded Cheatham’s appeal lacks legal merit.  Cheatham did not file a separate pro se brief.  

After a review of the record and briefs 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 arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved. [1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HUFF, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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