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.

Mark Eric Seitz, Appellant.

Appeal From York County
�Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.� 2010-UP-245
Submitted April 1, 2010 � Filed April 21, 2010

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Kevin S. Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Mark Eric Seitz appeals his conviction for grand larceny.� On appeal, Seitz argues the trial court erred in admitting an unduly suggestive identification of Seitz involving a single photograph and in failing to grant a directed verdict motion.� 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.

SHORT, WILLIAMS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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