State v. Burkhalter
State v. Burkhalter
Opinion
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.
Barry Duncan Burkhalter, Appellant.
Appeal From Lexington County
Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-040
Submitted January 3, 2006 Filed January 18, 2006
APPEAL DISMISSED
Acting Chief Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Donald V. Myers, of Lexington; for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Barry Duncan Burkhalter appeals his guilty plea to indecent exposure. Counsel for Burkhalter attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel. Burkhalter did not file a separate pro se response.
After a thorough review of the record as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss Burkhalters appeal and grant counsels petition to be relieved.[1]
APPEAL DISMISSED.
STILWELL, KITTREDGE, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.