State v. Williams

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.

Rodney Grant Williams, Appellant.

Appeal From Orangeburg County

 James C. Williams, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-281

Submitted June 1, 2007 – Filed June 6,
2007   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Deputy Chief Attorney for Capital Appeals Robert M. Dudek, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J.
Zelenka, all of Columbia; and Solicitor
David M. Pascoe, Jr., of Summerville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: 
Rodney Grant Williams appeals his conviction and sentence for murder.  Williams
argues the trial court failed to comply with the mandates of Boykin v.
Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  This issue is not preserved for review, as
Williams did not object at the plea proceeding.  State v. McKinney, 278
S.C. 107, 108, 292 S.E. 2d 598, 599 (1982) (“Absent timely objection at a plea
proceeding, the unknowing and involuntary nature of a guilty plea can only be
attacked through the more appropriate channel of Post-Conviction Relief.”).  After
a thorough review of the record and briefs, 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 the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL  DISMISSED.

HEARN,
C.J., KITTREDGE, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.