State v. Dunbar

CourtListener 10136906Scctapp11.03.2003

Gesamter Gesetzestext

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Respondent,

v.

Kelvin Dunbar,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Aiken County

William P. Keesley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-186

Submitted January 10, 2003 – Filed March 11, 2003

APPEAL DISMISSED

Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, of SC Office of Appellate
Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Deputy Director for Legal Services Teresa A. Knox, Legal Counsel
Tommy Evans, Jr., and Legal Counsel J. Benjamin Aplin, all of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Kelvin Dunbar was sentenced
to five years in prison suspended with two years probation, with credit for
eighty-one days in jail, for possession of a stolen vehicle, simple assault,
and trespassing.  Dunbar was brought before the court for a second time for
violating the following provisions of his probation: not reporting to the probation
officer, being convicted of criminal domestic violence, and not paying supervision
fees or surcharge.  The trial court revoked thirty months of Dunbar’s probation
and gave him credit for time served.  Dunbar appeals.

Dunbar’s appellate counsel submitted a petition
to be relieved as counsel, stating he had reviewed the record and has concluded
Dunbar’s appeal is without merit.  The issue raised in counsel’s brief concerns
whether the trial judge abused his discretion in revoking thirty months of Dunbar’s
sentence.  Dunbar filed a document with the court containing numerous arguments.

After a 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 hold there are no directly appealable issues
that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss Dunbar’s appeal
and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.
[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., GOOLSBY, and SHULER,
JJ.,
concur.

[1]   Because oral argument would not aid the court
in resolving the issues on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument
pursuant to Rules 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.