Maye v. State

I respectfully dissent from the main opinion affirming the revocation of David Christopher Maye’s probation and the imposition of the balance of his eight-year sentence.

This case was submitted to this Court by the procedure recognized in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Appellate counsel submitted a brief to this Court indicating that he found no viable issues to raise on *286appeal and requested to withdraw from his appointed representation of Maye. Maye did not avail himself of the opportunity to file pro se issues for this Court’s review. The opinion…