State v. Pimsler

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

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 of South Carolina,       
Respondent,

v.

Marc Pimsler,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Anderson County

J. Cordell Maddox, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2005-UP-086

Submitted February 1, 2005 – Filed February
7, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Druanne Dykes White, of Anderson, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Pimsler appeals after pleading
guilty to possession of methamphetamine.  Pimsler argues his plea was not made
knowingly or voluntarily and thus, did not comply with the requirements of Boykin
v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Pimsler’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved stating
that he has reviewed the record and found the appeal to be without merit.  Pimsler
did not file a separate pro se brief.

After a thorough review of the record pursuant
to Anders and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357
(1991), we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED. [1]

HEARN, C.J., KITTREDGE, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

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