State v. Conner

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.

Thomas Edward
Conner, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2009-UP-108

Submitted March 2, 2009 – Filed March 3,
2009 

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, 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 Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Thomas
Edward Conner appeals his guilty plea arguing the trial court erred in failing
to explain the sentencing consequences in his case.  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,
WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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