State v. Rogers

THIS OPINION HAS NO
PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY
PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Karl Rogers, Appellant.

Appeal From Sumter County

George C. James, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-535

Submitted November 2, 2009 – Filed
November 19, 2009   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender M. Celia Robinson, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Assistant Chief Legal Counsel J. Benjamin Aplin, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER
CURIAM:  Karl Rogers
appeals the revocation of his probation for forgery and committing a lewd act
on a minor, arguing the circuit court deprived him of due process by ordering
that he serve his sentences consecutively instead of concurrently.  After
thoroughly reviewing 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[1] Rogers's appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

WILLIAMS,
PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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