CourtListener 10156195•State v. Garza
Full text
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.
Charles E.
Garza, Appellant.
Appeal From Greenville County
Diane Schafer Goodstein, Circuit Court
Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-158
Submitted March 3, 2008 Filed March 12,
2008
APPEAL DISMISSED
Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, South Carolina Commission of
Indigent Defense, Division of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.
John Benjamin Aplin, South Carolina Department of Probation,
Parole, and Pardon Services, of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Charles Garza appeals his probation
revocation, arguing the amount of revocation is unconstitutionally disproportionate and constitutes cruel and unusual
punishment. 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[1] Garzas appeal and grant counsels motion to be relieved.
APPEAL
DISMISSED.
ANDERSON, SHORT, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215, SCACR.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.