State v. Millwood

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.

Heath
Millwood,        Appellant.

Appeal From Union County

Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.
2005-UP-492

Submitted August 1, 2005 – Filed August 18, 2005  

APPEAL DISMISSED

Acting Deputy Chief Attorney
Wanda H. Carter, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Henry
Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. Mcintosh,
Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Eilliott, office of the
Attorney General, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Heath
Millwood appeals after pleading guilty to assault and battery of a high and
aggravated nature.  Millwood argues his plea was not made knowingly or
voluntarily and thus, did not comply with the requirements of Boykin v.
Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Millwood’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved
stating that she has reviewed the record and found the appeal to be without
merit.  Millwood did not file a separate pro se brief.

After a thorough review of the
record pursuant to Anders and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406
S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be
relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.[1]

ANDERSON, J., HUFF and WILLIAMS,
JJ., concur.

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