State v. Hamm

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.

Michael E. Hamm,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

A. Victor Rawl, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-243

Submitted February 23, 2004 – Filed April 15, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Appellant pled guilty to indecent
exposure and was sentenced to concurrent terms of confinement totaling three
years.  The court also revoked three years of a previously entered probationary
sentence.       Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
Appellant’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved.  Appellant filed a pro
se response. 

After a review of the record as required by Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C.
116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we hold there are no directly appealable issues
that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and
grant counsel’s petition to be relieved. [1]    

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur. 
 

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