State v. Kelsey

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.

Kathryn Nicole Kelsey,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

Daniel  F.  Pieper, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-507

Submitted October 1, 2004 – Filed October
13, 2004

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 Donald J. Zelenka,
all of Columbia; and Solicitor Ralph E. Hoisington, of Charleston for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Kathryn Nicole Kelsey appeals
her concurrent sentences for voluntary manslaughter, armed robbery, and conspiracy,
arguing the sentences are “unconstitutionally disproportionate.”  Kelsey’s appellate
counsel has petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating she has reviewed the
record and has concluded Kelsey’s appeal is without merit.  The sole issue briefed
by counsel concerns whether Kelsey’s sentences were excessive.  Kelsey did not
file a separate pro se reply brief. 

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.

HEARN, C.J., HUFF and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

         
1  We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rules
215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.