Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2006-UP-217 - State v. Murray
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.

Leon Murray, Appellant.


Appeal From Dorchester County
 James C. Williams, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-217
Submitted April 1, 2006 – Filed April 18, 2006   


APPEAL DISMISSED


Robert M. Dudek, III, Assistant Appellate Defender, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliot, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia; and Solicitor David M. Pascoe, Jr., of Dorchester, for Respondent. 

PER CURIAM: Leon Murray pled guilty to the charges of possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute and possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute within a half mile of a school. Murray appeals these convictions, arguing that his guilty pleas did not comply with the mandates of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Murray’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved, stating he had reviewed the record and concluded the appeal is without legal merit sufficient to warrant a new trial. Murray 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] the appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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


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