State v. Cato

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL
VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCCEDDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Respondent,

v.

Gary Cato,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Dorchester County

Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-279

Submitted February 20, 2004 – Filed
April 26, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Walter M. Bailey, of Summerville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Gary Cato pled guilty
to two counts of second-degree arson and was sentenced to eight years imprisonment
on both counts, the sentences to run concurrently.  Pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Cato’s counsel attached a petition to be
relieved.  Cato filed a pro se response.

After review of the record 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 Cato’s appeal and grant counsel’s petition
to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
[1]

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE,
JJ., concurring.

[1] Because oral argument would not aid the Court in resolving any issue
on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215
and 220(b)(2), SCACR.