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.

David Jerome Glanville,        Appellant.

Appeal From Dorchester County
Thomas L. Hughston, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-524
Submitted August 1, 2005 – Filed September 15, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, 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. Elliott, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia, and Robert Douglas Robbins, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  David Jerome Glanville appeals his convictions for assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct with a minor, first degree and criminal sexual conduct with a minor, second degree.  He maintains the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because his indictment for criminal sexual conduct with a minor was insufficient.  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] Glanville’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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