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
In The Court of Appeals
The State, Respondent,
Kenneth J. Huffstetler, Appellant.
John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-247
Submitted April 1, 2005 – Filed April 7, 2005
Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, of
Columbia, for Appellant.
Legal Counsel Tommy Evans, Jr., Legal Counsel J. Benjamin Aplin, Deputy Director for Legal Services Teresa A. Knox, all of
Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Kenneth J. Huffstetler appeals the revocation of his probation. Huffstetler’s appellate counsel has petitioned to be relieved as counsel, stating she has reviewed the record and concluded Gaynor’s appeal is without merit. The sole issue briefed by counsel concerns whether the circuit court erred in failing to consider mitigating factors before finding he wilfully violated the terms of his parol argeement. Huffstetler did not file a separate pro se reply brief.
After a review of the record as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we hold there are no directly appealable issues that are arguable on their merits. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.
HEARN, C.J., KITTREDGE and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.