State v. Mintz
State v. Mintz
Opinion
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.
Christopher B. Mintz, Appellant.
Appeal From Charleston County
Daniel F. Pieper, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-210
Submitted April 1, 2006 Filed April 17, 2006
APPEAL DISMISSED
Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, Christopher B. Mintz, of Ridgeville, for Appellant.
Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, Ralph E. Hoisington, Ninth Circuit Solicitors Office, of Charleston, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Appellant, Christopher B. Mintz, pled guilty to armed robbery and conspiracy. He also pled guilty to a reduced charge of voluntary manslaughter. The trial judge sentenced him to concurrent terms of twenty-one years on the voluntary manslaughter and armed robbery charges. The sentence on the criminal conspiracy charge was for five years and it was also concurrent. Mintzs counsel attached to the brief a petition to be relieved as counsel, stating that she had reviewed the record and concluded this appeal lacks merit. Mintz did not file a separate pro se brief.
After a thorough review of the record 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[1] the appeal and grant counsels petition to be relieved.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
GOOLSBY, HUFF, and STILWELL, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.