State v. Boheler

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.

Lester James Boheler,       
Appellant.

Appeal From York County

Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-326

Submitted May 1, 2005 – Filed May 13, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

Deputy Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for Appellant

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Lester James Boheler appeals his guilty pleas for driving under the influence, fourth offense; driving under suspension, third offense; and being a habitual traffic offender.  Boheler’s appellate counsel has petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating he has reviewed the record and concluded Boheler’s appeal is without merit.  The sole issue briefed by counsel contends Boheler’s guilty pleas were rendered invalid by the circuit court’s statement that Boheler had ten days in which to file a notice of intent to appeal.  Boheler did not file a separate pro se brief.

After a review of the record and briefs 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 arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved. [1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HUFF, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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