Dagoberto Ontiveros v. State

Wyoming Supreme Court

Dagoberto Ontiveros v. State

2016 WY 94, 380 P.3d 91, 2016 Wyo. LEXIS 105, 2016 WL 5416329

CourtWyoming Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 28, 2016

DocketS-16-0127

StatusPublished

This text of 2016 WY 94 (Dagoberto Ontiveros v. State) 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

Dagoberto Ontiveros v. State, 2016 WY 94, 380 P.3d 91, 2016 Wyo. LEXIS 105, 2016 WL 5416329 (Wyo. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Order Affirming the District Court’s Judgment and Sentence

E. JAMES BURKE, Chief Justice

[¶1] This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant entered an unconditional “no contest” plea to second degree murder. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-104. The district court imposed a sentence of 20 to 24 years. Appellant filed this appeal to challenge the district court’s March 11, 2016, “Judgment and Sentence.”

[¶2] On June 27, 2016, Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel e-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). The next day, this Court entered an “Order Granting Motion for Extension of Time to File Pro Se Brief.” This Court ordered that, on or before August 11, 2016, Appellant “may file with this Court a pro se brief specifying the issues he would like this Court to consider in this appeal.” This Court also provided notice that, after the time for filing a pro se brief expired, this Court would “make its ruling on counsel’s motion to withdraw and, if appropriate, make a final decision on this appeal.” This Court later extended the time to file a pro se brief until September 12, 2016. The Court notes that Appellant did not timely file a pro se brief.

[¶3] Now, following a careful review of the record and the “Anders brief’ submitted by appellate counsel, this Court finds that appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw should be granted and the district court’s “Judgment and Sentence” should be affirmed. It is, therefore,

[¶4] ORDERED that the Wyoming Public Defender’s Office, court-appointed counsel for Appellant, Dagoberto Ontiveros, is hereby permitted to withdraw as counsel of record for Appellant; and it is further

[¶5] ORDERED that the district court’s March 11, 2016, “Judgment and Sentence” be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

[¶6] DATED this 28th of September, 2016.

BY THE COURT:

/s/E. JAMES BURKE CHIEF JUSTICE

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

Order Affirming the District Court’s Judgment and Sentence

E. JAMES BURKE, Chief Justice

[¶1] This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant entered an unconditional “no contest” plea to second degree murder. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-104. The district court imposed a sentence of 20 to 24 years. Appellant filed this appeal to challenge the district court’s March 11, 2016, “Judgment and Sentence.”

[¶2] On June 27, 2016, Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel e-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). The next day, this Court entered an “Order Granting Motion for Extension of Time to File Pro Se Brief.” This Court ordered that, on or before August 11, 2016, Appellant “may file with this Court a pro se brief specifying the issues he would like this Court to consider in this appeal.” This Court also provided notice that, after the time for filing a pro se brief expired, this Court would “make its ruling on counsel’s motion to withdraw and, if appropriate, make a final decision on this appeal.” This Court later extended the time to file a pro se brief until September 12, 2016. The Court notes that Appellant did not timely file a pro se brief.

[¶3] Now, following a careful review of the record and the “Anders brief’ submitted by appellate counsel, this Court finds that appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw should be granted and the district court’s “Judgment and Sentence” should be affirmed. It is, therefore,

[¶4] ORDERED that the Wyoming Public Defender’s Office, court-appointed counsel for Appellant, Dagoberto Ontiveros, is hereby permitted to withdraw as counsel of record for Appellant; and it is further

[¶5] ORDERED that the district court’s March 11, 2016, “Judgment and Sentence” be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

[¶6] DATED this 28th of September, 2016.

BY THE COURT:

/s/E. JAMES BURKE CHIEF JUSTICE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2016 WY 94, 380 P.3d 91, 2016 Wyo. LEXIS 105, 2016 WL 5416329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dagoberto-ontiveros-v-state-wyo-2016.

Opinion

E. JAMES BURKE, Chief Justice

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack