State v. Newell

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State,  Respondent,

v.

Christopher Patton Newell, Appellant.

Appeal From York County
Lee S. Alford, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-431
Submitted September 1, 2009 Filed September 9, 2009  

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender LaNelle C. DuRant, of Columbia, for Appellant.

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

PER CURIAM:  Christopher Patton Newell appeals his probation revocation, arguing the trial court erred by revoking his probation without first holding a full evidentiary 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 Newell's appeal and grant counsel's motion to be relieved. [1]

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

HUFF, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

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