State v. Autry

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.

Donoven Autry,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Chesterfield County

Paul M. Burch, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-246

Submitted February 23, 2004 – Filed
April 15, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, Office of Appellate
Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant,

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
of Columbia; and Solicitor Jay E. Hodge, Jr., of Darlington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Appellant pled guilty to carjacking
causing great bodily injury and was sentenced to eight years in prison.  Pursuant
to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Appellant’s counsel attached
a petition to be relieved.  Appellant did not file a pro se response.   

After a 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 hold there are no directly appealable issues
that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and
grant counsel’s petition to be relieved. [1]    

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur. 
 

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