State v. Coleman

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Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-266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 court’s revocation of her probation, arguing her due process rights were violated because no preliminary hearing was held.  Coleman’s 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 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] the appeal and grant counsel’s 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.