State v. Byers

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.

Timothy Jerome Byers,       
Appellant.

Appeal From York County

John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-184

Submitted January 29, 2004 – Filed March
17, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, Office of Appellate Defense,
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 Thomas E. Pope, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Timothy Jerome Byers appeals
his guilty plea to one count of distribution of crack cocaine and one count
of distribution of crack cocaine with proximity of a school district.  Byers’s
appellate counsel argues the circuit court erred in failing to ascertain that
Byers understood the facts of the case in relation to the applicable law, as
required by Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Byers did not file
a pro se reply brief.

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 Byers’s appeal and
grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.1

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

         
1  Because oral argument would not aid the court in resolving
the issues on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rules 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.