State v. Eubanks

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.

Freddie Eubanks, Appellant.

Appeal from Aiken County
  Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-662
Submitted December 1, 2008 Filed December 4, 2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, 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 Barbara R. Morgan, of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Freddie Eubanks appeals his guilty plea to use of a vehicle without consent.  He maintains his guilty plea failed to conform with the mandates set forth in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).  Specifically, Eubanks asserts the trial court failed to ensure he was aware of the constitutional rights he was waiving by pleading guilty.  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] Eubanks' appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., SHORT and KONDUROS, JJ., concur

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