State v. Whitten

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

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.

Joe Whitten, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

 J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-462

Submitted September 14, 2004 – Filed September 15, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, 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 Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg,
for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Mr. Whitten appeals after pleading
no contest to one count of indecent exposure.  The trial court sentenced Whitten
to three years in the South Carolina Department of Corrections, the sentence
being suspended upon the service of 18 months, and three years probation.  Whitten
argues the plea was not made knowingly or voluntarily and thus, it did not comply
with the requirements of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).    On
appeal, Whitten’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting no meritorious grounds for appeal exist and requesting
permission to withdraw from further representation.  Whitten has not filed a
pro se response. 

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]

GOOLSBY, ANDERSON, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

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