State v. Heydman ( 2011 )

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.

Robert Heydman, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Spartanburg County
Paul M. Burch, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-269
Submitted May 1, 2011 – Filed June 8, 2011

---

APPEAL DISMISSED

---

Senior Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barry J. Barnette, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Robert Heydman appeals his conviction for murder, arguing the trial court erred in declining to instruct the jury on accessory after the fact.  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 the appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

FEW, C.J., KONDUROS, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

---

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