State v. Coleman
This text of State v. Coleman (State v. Coleman) 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.
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)(1), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
v.
Lucille Coleman, Appellant.
Appeal From Aiken County
James R. Barber, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-266
Submitted March 1, 2005 Filed April 8, 2005
APPEAL DISMISSED
Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Teresa A. Knox, Tommy Evans, Jr., and J. Benjamin Aplin, all of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Lucille Coleman appeals the trial courts revocation of her probation, arguing her due process rights were violated because no preliminary hearing was held. Colemans counsel attached to the brief a petition to be relieved as counsel, stating he believes the appeal has no merit. Coleman did not file a pro se brief. After a thorough review of the record and counsels 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] the appeal and grant counsels petition to be relieved.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
HEARN, C.J., and KITTREDGE and WILLIAMS, 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Coleman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-coleman-scctapp-2005.