State v. Neuhaus
Annotate this CaseTHIS 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.
William Neuhaus, Appellant.
Appeal From Aiken County
Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-527
Submitted September 2, 2008 Filed
September 11, 2008
APPEAL DISMISSED
Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.
J. Benjamin Aplin, S.C. Dept. of Probation Parole & Pardon, of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: William Neuhaus appeals the revocation of his probation. Neubaus argues the probation judge abused his discretion by revoking Neuhaus's probation because the judge ignored Neuhaus's justifiable explanations for his violations. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Neuhaus'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] Neuhaus's appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
ANDERSON, WILLIAMS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.