Bowens v. State

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Bowens v. State

DecidedJuly 26, 2005

Docket2005-UP-467

StatusUnpublished

This text of Bowens v. State (Bowens v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowens v. State, (S.C. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Robert L. Bowens, Jr., Appellant,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Pickens County
Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-467
Submitted July 1, 2005 Filed July 26, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

James C. Alexander, of Pickens, for Appellant.

Attorney General Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General Christopher Newton, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Robert Bowens appeals the dismissal by the circuit court of his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. None of the issues raised impact the subject matter jurisdiction of the circuit court, and therefore, may not be raised at any time. See State v. Gentry, 363 S.C. 93, 610 S.E.2d 494 (2005). The issues raised in his petition are not properly raised by a writ of habeas corpus in circuit court. Simpson v. State, 329 S.C. 43, 46, 495 S.E.2d 429, 431 (1998). After a thorough review of the record, counsels Affidavit, and Bowens Pro Se 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 Bowens appeal and grant counsels motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.[1]

GOOLSBY, HUFF, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

Robert L. Bowens, Jr., Appellant,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Appeal From Pickens County
Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-467
Submitted July 1, 2005 Filed July 26, 2005

APPEAL DISMISSED

James C. Alexander, of Pickens, for Appellant.

Attorney General Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General Christopher Newton, Office of the Attorney General, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Robert Bowens appeals the dismissal by the circuit court of his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. None of the issues raised impact the subject matter jurisdiction of the circuit court, and therefore, may not be raised at any time. See State v. Gentry, 363 S.C. 93, 610 S.E.2d 494 (2005). The issues raised in his petition are not properly raised by a writ of habeas corpus in circuit court. Simpson v. State, 329 S.C. 43, 46, 495 S.E.2d 429, 431 (1998). After a thorough review of the record, counsels Affidavit, and Bowens Pro Se 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 Bowens appeal and grant counsels motion to be relieved.

APPEAL DISMISSED.[1]

GOOLSBY, HUFF, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Bowens v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowens-v-state-scctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack