State v. Gary

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.

Gary Martin Wright,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

Roger M. Young, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-366

Submitted May 1, 2005 – Filed May 26, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of Columbia, for Appellant. 

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott; all of Columbia; and Solicitor Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Gary Martin Wright appeals the court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to grand larceny.  Counsel for Wright attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel.  Wright did not file a separate pro se response.

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), and consideration of State v. Gentry, 363 S.C. 93, 610 S.E.2d 494 (2005), we hold there are no directly appealable issues that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss Wright’s appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

ANDERSON, STILWELL, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.