CourtListener 10142984•State v. Perella
Testo completo
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.
David Perella, Appellant.
Appeal From Spartanburg County
Howard P. King,
Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-504
Submitted October 1, 2007 Filed October 30, 2007
APPEAL DISMISSED
Chief
Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, 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 Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.
PER
CURIAM: David Perella
appeals his guilty pleas for: (1) trafficking in methamphetamines 28-100
grams, second offense; (2) manufacturing methamphetamines, third offense; (3)
possession of crack cocaine, third offense; (4) trafficking in methamphetamines
28-100 grams, second offense; (5) possession of a weapon during the commission
of a violent crime; (6) possession of a stolen pistol; (7) possession of
Klonopin, third offense; (8) possession of Percocet, third offense; (9)
possession of Xanax, third offense; (10) possession of Hydrocodone and
Acetaminophen; and (11) possession of marijuana, third offense. Perella
asserts his guilty plea was invalid because the trial judge informed him of his
right to an appeal, rendering the plea conditional. After a thorough review of the record and counsels
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[1] Perellas appeal and grant counsels 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.
Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude
Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.