State v. Culley

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.

Michael W.
Culley Appellant.

Appeal From York County

 John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2007-UP-457

Submitted October 1, 2007 – Filed October
11, 2007

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, South Carolina
Commission, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Deputy Director for Legal Services Teresa A Knox and Legal Counsel
J. Benjamin Aplin, S.C. Dept. of Probation Parole & Pardon, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Michael W. Culley appeals the revocation of his
probation.  Culley argues the decision to revoke probation was arbitrary and
capricious because there was insufficient evidence to establish Culley had
violated his probation conditions.  Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Culley’s counsel attached a petition to be relieved,
stating she reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit.  Culley
did not file a pro se brief, but sent a letter requesting counsel
not be relieved.  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] Culley’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN,
C.J., HUFF and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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