State v. Young

THIS OPINION HAS NO
PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY
PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Arthur Hamilton Young, Appellant.

Appeal From Greenville County

Roger L. Couch, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-476

Submitted October 1, 2009 – Filed October
13, 2009   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliot,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Arthur
Hamilton Young appeals his conviction for first-degree burglary, arguing the
trial court erred in sentencing him to life without the possibility of parole
because his two prior convictions for burglary arose from a single criminal
transaction.  After a thorough
review of the record and counsel's brief 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 motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

Huff, Thomas, and Pieper, JJ., concur.

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