State v. Young ( 2009 )

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,

v.

Arthur Hamilton Young, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Greenville County
Roger L. Couch, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-476
Submitted October 1, 2009 – Filed October 13, 2009   

---

APPEAL DISMISSED

---

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliot, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Arthur Hamilton Young appeals his conviction for first-degree burglary, arguing the trial court erred in sentencing him to life without the possibility of parole because his two prior convictions for burglary arose from a single criminal transaction.  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 motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Huff, Thomas, and Pieper, JJ., concur.

---

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