In re J.A.M.
This text of 2013 Ohio 449 (In re J.A.M.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as In re J.A.M., 2013-Ohio-449.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
BUTLER COUNTY
IN THE MATTER OF: J.A.M., et al. :
: CASE NO. CA2012-08-159
: DECISION 2/11/2013 :
APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS JUVENILE DIVISION Case No. JN2009-0383
Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, James Monk, Government Services Center, 315 High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, OH 45011-6057, for appellee
Heather Felerski, P.O. Box 181342, Fairfield, Ohio 45018, for appellant
Debra Rothstein, 10 Journal Square, 3rd Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, Guardian Ad Litem
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 Butler County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, and upon the
brief filed by appellant's counsel, oral argument having been waived.
{¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, J.T., has filed a brief with this court
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) indicates
that a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any Butler CA2000-00-000
errors by the trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of
error may be predicated; (2) lists one potential error "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} 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.
RINGLAND, P.J., S. POWELL and M. POWELL, JJ., concur.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2013 Ohio 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jam-ohioctapp-2013.