State v. Williams

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Williams. Read the opinion of the Court — 351 S.C. 591
Court of Appeals of South Carolina·Decided December 31, 2003·No. 2003-UP-768·Unpublished

Opinion

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State,        Respondent,

v.

Maurice Williams,        Appellant.


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


Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-768
Submitted October 15, 2003 – Filed December 31, 2003


APPEAL DISMISSED


Senior Assistant Appellate Defender Wanda H. Haile, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson, all of Columbia; Cecil Kelley Jackson, of Sumter, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Maurice Williams appeals his guilty pleas to one count of first-degree burglary and one count of possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime.  Counsel for Williams attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel.  Williams did not file a separate pro se response. 

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 the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HUFF, STILWELL, and BEATTY, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Williams, (S.C. Ct. App. 2003).

State v. Williams (State v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
State v. Williams
406 S.E.2d 357 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1991)