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Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-362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.