CourtListener 10154076•State v. Mitchell
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.
Vinson Mitchell, Appellant.
Appeal From Jasper County
J. Ernest Kinard, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-322
Submitted June 1, 2011 Filed June 22,
2011
APPEAL DISMISSED
Appellate Defender LaNelle Cantey DuRant,
of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Alan M. Wilson, Chief
Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, and Assistant Deputy Attorney General
Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Issac McDuffie Stone, III, of
Beaufort, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Vinson Mitchell appeals his conviction for malicious
injury to property, arguing his guilty plea did not comply with the mandates
set forth in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). 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 the appeal and
grant counsel's motion to be relieved.[1]
APPEAL DISMISSED.
SHORT, KONDUROS, and
GEATHERS, 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.