State v. Sullivan

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.

Larry Joe Sullivan, Appellant.

Appeal From Laurens County

William P. Keesley,
Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-434

Submitted October 1, 2007 – Filed October 9, 2007   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate
Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all
of Columbia; and Solicitor Jerry W. Peace, of Greenwood, for Respondent.

PER
CURIAM:  Larry Joe Sullivan appeals his guilty plea to criminal
sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree resulting in a sentence of
eighteen years in prison.  He maintains his guilty plea was not intelligent and
voluntary because the judge advised him of these rights in a cursory manner,
failing to convey the importance of these rights, and thus did not comply with  Boykin
v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Sullivan
also asserts a pro se argument.  After a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Sullivan’s pro se brief pursuant Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C.
116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss[1] Sullivan’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J.,
HUFF and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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