THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d) (2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
Dontavious Ricardo Mack, Appellant.
Appeal From York County
Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-008
Submitted January 4, 2010 – Filed January 21, 2010
Senior Appellate Attorney for south Carolina Commission of Indigent Defense, Division of Appellate Defense, Robert M. Dudek, South Carolina Commission, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, Kevin Scott Brackett, 16th Circuit Solicitor's Office, of York, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Dontavious Ricardo Mack pled guilty to one count of murder, one count of armed robbery, one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a violent crime, one count of kidnapping, one count of criminal conspiracy, one count of possession of a pistol by a person under the age of twenty-one, and one count of possession of a stolen vehicle. Mack appeals his concurrent sentences of thirty years for armed robbery, twenty years for kidnapping, five years for criminal conspiracy, five years for possession of a pistol during a violent crime, one year for possession of a pistol by a person under the age of twenty-one, five years for possession of a stolen vehicle valued over five thousand dollars, and life without parole for murder. Mack's counsel attached to the brief a petition to be relieved as counsel, stating that he had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit. Mack did not file a 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 the appeal and grant counsel's petition to be relieved.
HUFF, A.C.J., GEATHERS, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.
 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.