CourtListener 10151197•State v. Arthur
Gesamter Gesetzestext
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.
James Lamont Arthur, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2017-002595
Appeal From Horry County
Steven H. John, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2019-UP-364
Submitted October 1, 2019 – Filed November 13, 2019
APPEAL DISMISSED
Appellate Defender Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of
Columbia; and James Lamont Arthur, pro se.
Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior
Assistant Deputy Attorney General William M. Blitch,
Jr., both of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Dismissed after consideration of Appellant's pro se brief and
review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's motion to
be relieved is granted.1
APPEAL DISMISSED.
HUFF, WILLIAMS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.