State v. Crenshaw

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.

LeTanya Renee
Crenshaw, Appellant.

Appeal From York County

 Larry R. Patterson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-463

Submitted August 1, 2008 – Filed August 8,
2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Deputy Chief Attorney Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Teresa A. Knox, Deputy Director for Legal Services, Tommy Evans,
Jr., Legal Counsel, and J. Benjamin Aplin, Legal Counsel, all of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Letanya
Renee Crenshaw appeals the revocation of
her probation.  Crenshaw argues the probation judge erred in revoking her
probation in full in light of her pending employment opportunity.  Pursuant to Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Crenshaw’s counsel attached a petition
to be relieved, stating she reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks
merit.  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[1] Crenshaw’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

KONDUROS, J., CURETON, A.J., and GOOLSBY, A.J., concur.

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