State v. Pocock ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as State v. Pocock, 2014-Ohio-3787.]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
    CLINTON COUNTY
    STATE OF OHIO,                                     :
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                        :      CASE NO. CA2014-03-006
    :           DECISION
    - vs -                                                         9/2/2014
    :
    DUSTIN W. POCOCK,                                  :
    Defendant-Appellant.                       :
    CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLINTON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
    Case No. 2013-5387
    Richard W. Moyer, Clinton County Prosecuting Attorney, 103 West Main Street, Wilmington,
    Ohio 45177, for plaintiff-appellee
    Foster Law, LLC, Mary T. Foster, 636 Northland Blvd., Suite 100, Cincinnati, Ohio 45240, for
    defendant-appellant
    Per Curiam.
    {¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of
    the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the
    Clinton County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel.
    {¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, Dustin W. Pocock, has filed a brief with this
    court pursuant to Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 
    87 S. Ct. 1396
    (1967), which (1)
    Clinton CA2014-03-006
    indicates that a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any
    errors by the trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of
    error may be predicated; (2) lists potential errors "that might arguably support the appeal,"
    Anders at 
    744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400
    ; (3) requests that this court review the record independently
    to determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement
    of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for
    appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both
    the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant.
    {¶ 3} Although the brief filed by appellant's counsel does not specifically suggest
    potential errors that may have been committed at the trial level, counsel does "note that there
    were no motions filed on the defendant-appellant's behalf. There were no motions made by
    the defendant-appellant or counsel on his behalf to withdraw his guilty plea at anytime, the
    Court did not impose the maximum sentence in this case and the Court appeared to have
    complied with Crim.R. 11 in accepting appellant's plea."          The court will construe this
    statement as suggesting potential errors involving (1) the lack of pretrial motions filed on
    appellant's behalf; (2) the appropriateness of appellant's sentence; and (3) compliance with
    Crim.R. 11.
    {¶ 4} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having
    been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to
    appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appellant
    requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason that
    it is wholly frivolous.
    S. POWELL, P.J., PIPER and M. POWELL, JJ., concur.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CA2014-03-006

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 9/2/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014