From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Mar 30, 2022
No. 2022-UP-154 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2022)

Opinion

2022-UP-154 Appellate Case 2019-001034

03-30-2022

The State, Respondent, v. Dominick Antonio Thompson, Appellant.

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, and Dominick Antonio Thompson, 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 January 1, 2022

Appeal From Spartanburg County J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge.

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, and Dominick Antonio Thompson, 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. 1

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

WILLIAMS, C.J., MCDONALD, J., and LOCKEMY, A.J., concur. 2


Summaries of

State v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Mar 30, 2022
No. 2022-UP-154 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2022)
Case details for

State v. Thompson

Case Details

Full title:The State, Respondent, v. Dominick Antonio Thompson, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Mar 30, 2022

Citations

No. 2022-UP-154 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2022)