Gardner v. State

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 Supreme Court

Freddie Gardner, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Lee County
 R. Ferrell Cothran, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Memorandum Opinion No.  2011-MO-040
Submitted December 14, 2011 Filed December 19, 2011

AFFIRMED

Freddie Gardner, Pro Se.

Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Mary S. Williams, Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:   This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court denying petitioner's Rule 60(b), SCRCP, motion.  Petitioner filed a notice of appeal and a "Rule 243(c) Explanation" with attached documentation.  Because Rule 243(c), SCACR, does not apply in this appeal from the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion, no explanation was required.  Accordingly, we have construed the explanation, and the documentation attached thereto, as petitioner's brief and record for purposes of this appeal.

We affirm the decision of the circuit court pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Rule 60(b), SCRCP; Linda McCompany, Inc. v. Shore, 390 S.C. 543, 703 S.E.2d 499 (2010).

AFFIRMED. 

TOAL, C.J., BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur. PLEICONES, J., not participating.