State v. Dinkins

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.

Freddie Oneal Dinkins, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

Reginald I. Lloyd, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-179

Submitted April 2, 2007 – Filed April 18, 2007

APPEAL DISMISSED

Acting Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Columbia, for Appellant. 

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott; and Solicitor Warren Blair Giese, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Freddie Oneal Dinkins appeals the revocation of his probation, arguing the revocation was in violation of his due process rights.  Counsel for Dinkins attached to the final brief a petition to be relieved as counsel.  Dinkins did not file a separate pro se response.

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 the appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., GOOLSBY, and STILWELL, JJ., concur. 

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.