State v. Pearson

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Respondent,

v.

Adrian Pearson,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

L. Casey Manning, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-639

Submitted August 20, 2003 – Filed November
13, 2003   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, 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, Warren Blair Giese, Fifth Circuit Solicitor's Office, of Columbia,
for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Adrian Pearson appeals from
his guilty plea to assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature (ABHAN)
and armed robbery.  Pearson contends the trial judge erred by accepting his
guilty plea before ascertaining whether Pearson understood the facts of the
case in regard to the applicable law. Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Pearson’s counsel attached to the brief a petition to be
relieved as counsel, stating he reviewed the record and concluded Pearson’s
appeal lacks merit.  Pearson did not file a separate pro se brief. 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] Pearson’s appeal and grant counsel’s
motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., ANDERSON, J., and CURETON, A.J.,
concur.

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