State v. Rhodes

Opinion

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.

Eugene Lamont Rhodes, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Williamsburg County
 Howard P. King, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-400
Submitted September 1, 2007 – Filed September 28, 2007   

---

APPEAL DISMISSED

---

Aileen P. Clare, Appellate Defender, of Columbia; for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster,  Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh,  Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, of Columbia; and C. Kelly Jackson, Solicitor, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Eugene Lamont Rhodes appeals his convictions for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, and possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute within proximity of a public park, arguing the trial court erred in not granting his motion for a directed verdict.  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 Rhodes’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

---

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