State v. Holland

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.

Donald Greg Holland, a/k/a Larry Holland, Appellant.

Appeal From Colleton County

 John C. Few, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2007-UP-288

Submitted June 1, 2007 – Filed June 7,
2007

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, South Carolina Commission
on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

J. Benjamin Aplin, South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole
& Pardon, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Larry
Holland appeals the circuit court’s decision to revoke his probation.  Holland argues the circuit court erred in revoking his probation.  We disagree.  “The determination of whether or not to revoke
probation is within the trial court’s discretion.”  State v. Pauling,
371 S.C. 435, 430, 639 S.E.2d 680, 681 (Ct. App. 2006).  Our authority to
review this determination is “confined to correcting errors of law unless the
lack of a legal or evidentiary basis indicates the circuit judge’s decision was
arbitrary and capricious.”  Id.  Here, Holland admitted he violated the
terms of his probation.  Further, the record demonstrates an evidentiary basis
for the circuit court’s decision.  Accordingly, after a thorough review of the
record, counsel’s brief, and Holland’s pro se 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 this appeal and grant counsel’s motion
to be relieved. 

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J.,
KITTREDGE, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.