State v. Livingston

THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Octavius
Livingston, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

James R. Barber, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-019

Submitted January 1, 2011 – Filed January
25, 2011   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Salley W. Elliott, and Solicitor Warren Blair Giese, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Octavius
Livingston appeals his conviction for distribution of cocaine, third-offense. 
Livingston argues the trial court violated his confrontation clause rights by admitting
the police officer's testimony regarding the video tape of an undercover officer's
conversation with a confidential informant.  After a thorough review of the record, counsel's brief, and
Livingston'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[1] the appeal and grant counsel's petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

FEW, C.J., SHORT and
WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

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