From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Lincoln

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Oct 26, 2022
No. 2022-UP-393 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2022)

Opinion

2022-UP-393 Appellate Case 2021-000863

10-26-2022

The State, Respondent, v. Jonathan Art Lincoln, Appellant.

Appellate Defender Lara Mary Caudy, of Columbia, and Jonathan Art Lincoln, pro se, both for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., both of Columbia, for Respondent.


THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

Submitted October 11, 2022

Appeal From Aiken County Jocelyn Newman, Circuit Court Judge

Appellate Defender Lara Mary Caudy, of Columbia, and Jonathan Art Lincoln, pro se, both for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General William M. Blitch, Jr., both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Dismissed after consideration of Appellant's pro se brief and review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's motion to be relieved is granted.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

We decide this case without argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

WILLIAMS, C.J., THOMAS J., and LOCKEMY, A.J., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Lincoln

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Oct 26, 2022
No. 2022-UP-393 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2022)
Case details for

State v. Lincoln

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. Jonathan Art Lincoln, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Oct 26, 2022

Citations

No. 2022-UP-393 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2022)