Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-462 - State v. Whitten
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

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.

Joe Whitten, Appellant.


Appeal From Spartanburg County
 J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-462
Submitted September 14, 2004 – Filed September 15, 2004


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 Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Mr. Whitten appeals after pleading no contest to one count of indecent exposure.  The trial court sentenced Whitten to three years in the South Carolina Department of Corrections, the sentence being suspended upon the service of 18 months, and three years probation.  Whitten argues the plea was not made knowingly or voluntarily and thus, it did not comply with the requirements of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).    On appeal, Whitten’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting no meritorious grounds for appeal exist and requesting permission to withdraw from further representation.  Whitten has not filed a pro se response. 

After a thorough review of the record pursuant to Anders and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED. [1]

GOOLSBY, ANDERSON, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.


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