State v. Watson

CourtListener 10138845Scctapp06.04.2006

Gesamter Gesetzestext

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.

Kem L. Watson, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

 G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-184

Submitted April 1, 2006 – File April 6, 2006   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant 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 Warren Blair Giese, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Kem Watson appeals his guilty plea of breach of trust with fraudulent intent.  Watson argues the trial judge failed to comply with the mandates set forth in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969), in accepting his plea.  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 Watson’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.[1]

GOOLSBY, HUFF, and STILWELL, JJ., concur. 

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

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.