State v. Mavins

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 Mavins, Appellant.

Appeal From Lexington
County

 Marc H. Westbrook, Circuit
Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion
No. 2004-UP-303

Submitted February 20, 2004
– Filed May 6, 2004

APPEAL DISMISSED

Assistant Appellate Defender
Aileen P. Clare, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Deputy Director for Legal
Services Teresa A. Knox, Legal Counsel Tommy Evans, Jr., Legal Counsel
J. Benjamin Aplin, S.C. Dept. of Probation, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Charles Mavins
appeals the revocation of his probation.  Mavins’s appellate counsel has petitioned
to be relieved as counsel, stating she has reviewed the record and has concluded
Mavins’s appeal is without merit.  The issue briefed by counsel concerns whether
there was an evidentiary showing of fact to justify the revocation.  Mavins
has not filed any documents on his own behalf.

After a review of the record as required
by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams,
305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we hold there are no directly appealable
issues that are arguable on their merits.  Accordingly, we dismiss Mavins’s
appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.
[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE,
JJ., concur.

[1]   Because oral argument would not aid the court in resolving the issues
on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rules 215
and 220(b)(2), SCACR.