State v. Canfield
State v. Canfield
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 268(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals The State, Respondent, v. Clifford Dean Canfield, Appellant.
Appellate Case No. 2016-002574
Appeal From York County John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2019-UP-404 Submitted November 1, 2019 – Filed December 31, 2019
APPEAL DISMISSED
Appellate Defender Taylor Davis Gilliam, of Columbia; and Clifford Dean Canfield, pro se, for Appellant.
Matthew C. Buchanan, of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, 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.
SHORT, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.