State v. Hudson ( 2008 )

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.

John David Hudson, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Darlington County
James E. Lockemy, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-563
Submitted October 1, 2008 – Filed October 13, 2008   

---

APPEAL DISMISSED

---

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Jay E. Hodge, Jr., of Cheraw, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  John David Hudson appeals his convictions of two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, attempting or committing a lewd action upon a child, and first degree sexual exploitation of a minor.  Hudson’s counsel argues the trial court erred by admitting two photographs into evidence, maintaining their prejudicial effect outweighed any probative value.  Hudson filed a separate pro se brief reasserting his counsel’s argument and contending the trial court erred by admitting illegally obtained evidence and violated his due process rights by not allowing him to cross-examine two individuals.  After a thorough review of the record and both 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 Hudson’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved. [1]

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

ANDERSON, WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

---

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