CourtListener 10137657•State v. Lopez
Texto completo
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.
Ervin Lopez, Appellant.
Appeal From Richland County
James C. Williams, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-306
Submitted February 20, 2004 Filed May 6, 2004
APPEAL DISMISSED
Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, Office of Appellate Defense,
of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General
John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson,
all of Columbia; snd Solicitor Warren Blair Giese, of Columbia, for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Ervin Lopez was convicted of strong-arm robbery, assault
and battery of a high and aggravated nature (ABHAN), attempted grand larceny
of a motor vehicle, and kidnapping. He was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment
for strong-arm robbery, ten years imprisonment for ABHAN, five years imprisonment
for attempted grand larceny, and life without parole for kidnapping, the sentences
to run consecutively. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), Lopezs counsel attached a petition to be relieved as counsel. Lopez
filed a pro se response.
After review of the record 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 Lopezs appeal and grant counsels petition
to be relieved.
APPEAL DISMISSED. [1]
GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concurring.
[1] Because oral argument would not aid the Court in resolving
any issue on appeal, we decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215 and 220(b)(2), SCACR.
Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.