Board of Professional Resp. v. Strand

Wyoming Supreme Court

Board of Professional Resp. v. Strand

2006 WY 117, 143 P.3d 351, 2006 Wyo. LEXIS 124, 2006 WL 2709467

CourtWyoming Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 22, 2006

DocketNo. 06-29

StatusPublished

This text of 2006 WY 117 (Board of Professional Resp. v. Strand) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Board of Professional Resp. v. Strand, 2006 WY 117, 143 P.3d 351, 2006 Wyo. LEXIS 124, 2006 WL 2709467 (Wyo. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

BARTON R. VOIGT, Chief Justice.

This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that appellant has failed to file a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. On June 29, 2006, appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a “Motion to Withdraw” as counsel, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the “Anders brief’ submitted by counsel, this Court entered its “Order Granting Permission for Court Appointed Counsel to Withdraw and Conditionally Affirming Order Denying Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence,” on July 18, 2006. That Order provided that the District Court’s December 28, 2005, “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” would be summarily affirmed unless the appellant, Robbie James Modrell, on or before September 1, 2006, filed a brief that persuaded this Court that the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. Taking notice that the appellant, Robbie James Modrell, has failed to file a brief or other pleading within the time allotted, the Court finds that the “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” should be affirmed. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the District Court’s December 28, 2005, “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

BY THE COURT:

BARTON R. VOIGT Chief Justice

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BARTON R. VOIGT, Chief Justice.

This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that appellant has failed to file a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. On June 29, 2006, appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a “Motion to Withdraw” as counsel, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the “Anders brief’ submitted by counsel, this Court entered its “Order Granting Permission for Court Appointed Counsel to Withdraw and Conditionally Affirming Order Denying Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence,” on July 18, 2006. That Order provided that the District Court’s December 28, 2005, “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” would be summarily affirmed unless the appellant, Robbie James Modrell, on or before September 1, 2006, filed a brief that persuaded this Court that the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. Taking notice that the appellant, Robbie James Modrell, has failed to file a brief or other pleading within the time allotted, the Court finds that the “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” should be affirmed. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the District Court’s December 28, 2005, “Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence” be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

BY THE COURT:

BARTON R. VOIGT Chief Justice

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2006 WY 117, 143 P.3d 351, 2006 Wyo. LEXIS 124, 2006 WL 2709467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-professional-resp-v-strand-wyo-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack