State v. holliday

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

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)(1), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State,       
Respondent,

v.

Franklin Wayne Holliday,       
Appellant.

Appeal From York County

John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-641

Submitted December 1, 2004 – Filed December
20, 2004   

 

APPEAL DISMISSED

Acting Chief Appellate Defender Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia for Appellant.

Teresa A. Knox, Tommy Evans, Jr., J. Benjamin Aplin, South Carolina Department
of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Franklin Wayne Holliday appeals
arguing the trial judge abused his discretion in revoking his probation.  Holliday’s
counsel attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel, stating
he had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit.  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] the appeal
and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

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