State v. Medford

PER CURIAM:

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State ,       
Respondent,

v.

James Burton Medford,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Union County

J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-299

Submitted February 20, 2003 - Filed
April 30, 2003  

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, 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;
Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  James Burton Medford appeals from his guilty plea to two
counts of second-degree burglary, three counts of malicious injury to personal
property, and two counts of petit larceny.  Medford contends the term of his
sentence was grossly disproportionate to the sentences his co-defendants received
and thereby violated the Eighth Amendments prohibition against cruel and unusual
punishment.  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 [1] Medford’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., CURETON and GOOLSBY, JJ., concur.

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