Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2008-UP-669 - State v. Stinson

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.

Rollie Stinson, Appellant.


Appeal From Greenville County
D. Garrison Hill, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-669
Submitted December 1, 2008 – Filed December 8, 2008   


APPEAL DISMISSED


Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Robert M. Ariail, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Rollie Stinson appeals his driving under the influence conviction and sentence of five years imprisonment.  Stinson’s counsel argues the trial court erred by admitting the Datamaster results because the administrator of the test did not establish the machine was in working order.  Stinson filed a pro se brief, containing a multitude of arguments.   After a thorough review of the record and both briefs 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 Stinson’s appeal and grant counsel’s motion to be relieved. [1]

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

ANDERSON, HUFF, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


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