Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2007-UP-288 - State v. Holland

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

The State, Respondent,

v.

Donald Greg Holland, a/k/a Larry Holland, Appellant.


Appeal From Colleton County
 John C. Few, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No.  2007-UP-288
Submitted June 1, 2007 – Filed June 7, 2007


APPEAL DISMISSED


Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant.

J. Benjamin Aplin, South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole & Pardon, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Larry Holland appeals the circuit court’s decision to revoke his probation.  Holland argues the circuit court erred in revoking his probation.  We disagree.  “The determination of whether or not to revoke probation is within the trial court’s discretion.”  State v. Pauling, 371 S.C. 435, 430, 639 S.E.2d 680, 681 (Ct. App. 2006).  Our authority to review this determination is “confined to correcting errors of law unless the lack of a legal or evidentiary basis indicates the circuit judge’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.”  Id.  Here, Holland admitted he violated the terms of his probation.  Further, the record demonstrates an evidentiary basis for the circuit court’s decision.  Accordingly, after a thorough review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Holland’s 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 this appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved. 

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., KITTREDGE, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.