State v. Pugh

[Cite as State v. Pugh, 2016-Ohio-5755.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
SANDUSKY COUNTY
State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. S-16-009
Appellee Trial Court No. CRB 1500906 A
v.
Gary L. Pugh, Jr. DECISION AND JUDGMENT
Appellant Decided: September 9, 2016
*****
Brett A. Klimkowsky, for appellant.
*****
PIETRYKOWSKI, J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Gary L. Pugh, Jr., appeals the February 9, 2016
judgment of the Fremont Municipal Court which, following his guilty plea to resisting
arrest, sentenced him to 30 days in jail to be served consecutively to a three-day sentence
on an OVI conviction. Appellant was also required to pay various fines.
{¶ 2} The relevant facts of this case are as follows. On November 28, 2015,
appellant was charged with resisting arrest, obstructing official business, and drug abuse.
The charges stemmed from a stop of appellant’s vehicle, observation of marijuana, and a
physical confrontation with the officers effectuating his arrest.
{¶ 3} On January 7, 2016, appellant entered a guilty plea to resisting arrest; the
remaining charges were dismissed. Appellant was sentenced and this appeal followed.
{¶ 4} Appellant has appealed the conviction and sentence to this court through
appointed counsel. Appellant’s counsel advises the court, however, under procedures
announced in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967),
that he has thoroughly examined the record, discussed the case with appellant, and is
unable to find meritorious grounds for appeal. Following Anders and 6th
Dist.Loc.App.R. 10(G), appellate counsel filed a brief stating that he can find no arguable
errors and requesting that the court independently examine the record for error. Counsel
notified appellant of his inability to find meritorious grounds for appeal and provided
appellant with copies of both the Anders brief and his motion to withdraw. Counsel
advised appellant of his right to file his own appellate brief. Counsel has also filed a
motion to withdraw as counsel. Appellant has not filed an additional brief
{¶ 5} Upon review of appellant’s counsel’s no-error brief and upon independent
review of the record of the proceedings below, we conclude that this appeal lacks any
issue of arguable merit and is, therefore, wholly frivolous. We grant the motion of
2.
appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel in this appeal and affirm the judgment of the
Fremont Municipal Court. Pursuant to App.R. 24, appellant is ordered to pay the costs in
this appeal. The clerk is ordered to serve all parties with notice of this decision.
Judgment affirmed.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27.
See also 6th Dist.Loc.App.R. 4.
Mark L. Pietrykowski, J. _______________________________
JUDGE
Arlene Singer, J.
_______________________________
James D. Jensen, P.J. JUDGE
CONCUR.
_______________________________
JUDGE
3.