State v. Hinton

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.

Rodney Tremaine
Hinton, Appellant.

Appeal From York County

 Larry R. Patterson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-445

Submitted August 1, 2008 – Filed August 6,
2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate
Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for Appellant.

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

PER CURIAM: Rodney Tremaine Hinton was convicted of distribution
of crack cocaine.  Hinton’s participation in a community supervision program
was terminated for (1) failure to follow his supervising agent’s instructions
and advice, (2) failure to abide by the conditions of the electronic monitoring
program by leaving his residence without permission on four occasions, (3)
failure to maintain stable employment, and (4) failure to pay supervision fees
as ordered.  Hinton appeals, arguing the circuit court erred in revoking his
community supervision without the benefit of a preliminary hearing.  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] Hinton’s appeal and grant counsel’s petition 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.