State v. Williams

CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
CitationState v. Williams, 406 S.E.2d 357, 305 S.C. 116 (S.C. 1991)
Decision Date08 July 1991
PartiesThe STATE, Respondent, v. Ronnie WILLIAMS, Appellant.
ORDER

This case has been briefed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Because of the apparent confusion which exists over how Anders cases are to be processed under the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules, we set forth the following procedure:

(1) If appellant's counsel determines an Anders brief is appropriate, he shall serve and file the initial brief and designation of matter as provided by Rules 207 and 208, SCACR. The brief shall contain a petition to be relieved as counsel.

(2) The respondent may serve and file an initial brief if it desires to do so. The respondent shall not be bound by appellant's statement of the case if it fails to serve an initial brief. Even if the respondent does not prepare a brief, it may serve and file a designation of matter to be included in the record on appeal if it believes appellant's designation is insufficient for an Anders review by this Court.

(3) At the time the final brief(s) are filed with this Court, appellant's counsel shall serve appellant with a copy of the brief(s) and record on appeal. Proof of service showing that these documents have been served on appellant shall be filed with the Court. The Clerk's office will then give the appellant forty-five (45) days to file a pro se brief addressing any issues he wishes to raise. The respondent shall...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2862 cases
  • Gary v. Cartledge
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • July 29, 2015
    ...of Appeals stated the following:After review of the record 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 Gary's appeal and grant counsel's petition to be relieved.[App. 2618-19.] Based upon a review of the eviden......
  • Eppenger v. McFadden
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • July 31, 2014
    ...of arguable merit is discovered, the appeal will be dismissed and counsel's petition to be relieved will be granted." State v. Williams. 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991). Counsel's actions in choosing to file an Anders brief are entitled to deference here and the burden remains on Eppeng......
  • McHam v. State
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • July 17, 2013
    ...the entire record, including the complete trial transcript, for any preserved issues with potential merit. See State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 117, 406 S.E.2d 357, 358 (1991) (Upon the receipt of an Anders brief and “the receipt of the pro se brief or the expiration of the period to file a......
  • Pantovich v. State
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • August 7, 2019
    ...with the court of appeals pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and State v. Williams , 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991). Appellate counsel did not mention the trial court's denial of Pantovich's request to charge the jury on good characte......
  • Get Started for Free