State v. Bright

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.

Ellen Marie Bright, Appellant.

Appeal From Spartanburg County

 J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2007-UP-366 

Submitted September 14, 2007 – Filed September 17, 2007

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

J. Benjamin Aplin, S.C. Dept. of Probation Parole & Pardon, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Ellen Marie Bright appeals her probation revocation.  Bright maintains that the trial court erred by allowing a non-lawyer to present the State’s case for revoking Bright’s probation.  Bright did not file a pro se brief.  After a thorough review of the record and counsel’s 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 Bright’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., and HUFF and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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