State v. Loving

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.

Ronnie Edward Loving, Appellant.

Appeal From Cherokee County

Roger L. Couch, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-231

Submitted April 1, 2006 – Filed April 25, 2006

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, 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 Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Ronnie E. Loving appeals his conviction and sentence for felony driving under the influence causing great bodily injury.  Counsel for Loving attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel.  Loving did not file a separate pro se response.

After a thorough 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 dismiss Loving’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HUFF, and STILWELL, JJ., concur.

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