State v. McKenzie

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.

Marcus
McKenzie, Appellant.

Appeal From Aiken County

 Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-177

Submitted March 3, 2008 – Filed March 13,
2008   

APPEAL DISMISSED

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

Teresa A. Knox, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Marcus McKenzie appeals his probation
revocation, arguing the trial court erred
in revoking his probation because insufficient evidence supported finding he violated the terms of his
probation.  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] McKenzie’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J.,
PIEPER, J., and GOOLSBY, A.J., concur.

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