State v. Holmes

THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Ramona Holmes, Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

 Daniel  F.  Pieper, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-378

Submitted June 1, 2009 –Filed June 30,
2009   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Deputy Chief Attorney for Capital Appeals Robert M. Dudek, 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 Scarlett Anne Wilson, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Ramona
Holmes appeals her guilty pleas for three
counts of forgery, financial transaction card fraud, swindling, and exploitation
of a vulnerable adult.  On
appeal, Holmes' counsel alleges the plea
did not meet the mandates of 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[1] the appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

SHORT, WILLIAMS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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