CourtListener 10156101•State v. Brown
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 239(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
v.
Jerome Bernard Brown, Appellant.
Appeal From Richland County
Judge Carmen T. Mullen, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-468
Submitted August 1, 2008 Filed August 8, 2008
APPEAL DISMISSED
Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, South Carolina
Commission on Indigent Defense, Division of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.
J. Benjamin Aplin, Legal Counsel, South Carolina Department
of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, all of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Jerome
Bernard Brown appeals the revocation of his probation. Brown argues the
probation judge erred in revoking his probation without making the requisite
inquiry into the reasons he failed to pay supervision fees, restitution, and fines. After a thorough review of the record and counsels 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 counsels motion to be relieved.[1]
APPEAL
DISMISSED.
KONDUROS, J., CURETON, A.J., and
GOOLSBY, A.J., 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.