Mason v. Roulhac
Opinion
[Cite as Mason v. Roulhac, 2021-Ohio-279.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
WARREN COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO/CITY OF MASON, :
Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2020-06-034
: DECISION - vs - 2/1/2021 :
GEORGE L. ROULHAC, :
Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM MASON MUNICIPAL COURT Case No. 20CRB00038
Bethany Bennett, City of Mason Prosecuting Attorney, 5950 South Mason-Montgomery Road, Mason, Ohio 45040, for appellee
Alexander Webb & Kinman, Maxwell D. Kinman, 423 Reading Road, Mason, Ohio 45040, for appellant
Per Curiam.
{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by
appellant, George L. Roulhac, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript
of proceedings and original papers from the Mason Municipal Court, and upon the brief filed
by appellant's counsel. Warren CA2020-06-034
{¶2} Appellant's counsel 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 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.
PIPER, P.J., M. POWELL and BYRNE, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2021 Ohio 279 (Mason v. Roulhac) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.