State v. Mack

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.

Tevel Eugene Mack Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

 A. Victor Rawl, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-010

Submitted January 3, 2006 – Filed January 5, 2006   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, 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 Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Tevel Mack appeals his guilty plea for numerous crimes, including armed robbery and kidnapping.  He maintains his guilty plea failed to conform with the mandates set forth in Boykin v. Alabama.  395 U.S. 238 (1969).  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 Mack’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.[1]

GOOLSBY, ANDERSON, and SHORT, JJ., concur.

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