Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-184 - State v. Byers

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.

Timothy Jerome Byers,        Appellant.


Appeal From York County
John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-184
Submitted January 29, 2004 – Filed March 17, 2004


APPEAL DISMISSED


Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

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


PER CURIAM:  Timothy Jerome Byers appeals his guilty plea to one count of distribution of crack cocaine and one count of distribution of crack cocaine with proximity of a school district.  Byers’s appellate counsel argues the circuit court erred in failing to ascertain that Byers understood the facts of the case in relation to the applicable law, as required by Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Byers did not file a 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 Byers’s appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.1

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.


          1  Because oral argument would not aid the court in resolving the issues on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rules 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.