State v. Bradley

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.

Henry Bradley, Appellant.

Appeal From Dorchester County

J. Cordell Maddox, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-362

Submitted June 1, 2011 – Filed June 30,
2011   

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Attorney General Salley
W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe, Jr., of Summerville,
for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Henry
Bradley appeals his conviction for armed robbery.  His counsel argues the
circuit court erred in denying his motion to exclude an eyewitness
identification.  Additionally, Bradley filed a pro se brief.  After a thorough review of the record and all briefs
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.

FEW, C.J., and HUFF and
KONDUROS, JJ., concur. 

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