State v. Heatley

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.

Michelle Heatley,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-382

Submitted April 21, 2004 – Filed June
18, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott;
and Solicitor Warren B. Giese, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Michelle Heatley
pled guilty to one count of exploitation of a vulnerable adult, two counts of
breach of trust, and two counts of bank fraud.  The circuit court sentenced
her to ten years imprisonment for exploitation, ten years imprisonment for each
count of breach of trust, and five years imprisonment on each count of bank
fraud, the sentences to run concurrently.  Additionally, the circuit court ordered
Heatley to pay restitution to the victims.  Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Heatley’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved. 
Heatley did not file a pro se response.

After review of the record 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 Heatley’s appeal and grant counsel’s
petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
[1]

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and BEATTY, JJ., concurring.

[1] Because oral argument would not aid the Court in resolving any issue
on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215
and 220(b)(2), SCACR.