State v. Chapman

2016 Ohio 454
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Chapman. Read the opinion of the Court — 2018 Ohio 1142
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided February 8, 2016·No. CA2015-07-140·Published

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Chapman, 2016-Ohio-454.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

BUTLER COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO, :

Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2015-07-140

: DECISION - vs - 2/8/2016 :

OBRYAN DESHAWN CHAPMAN, :

Defendant-Appellant. :

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. CR2012-06-0999

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Government Services Center, 315 High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for plaintiff-appellee

Fred S. Miller, Baden & Jones Bldg., 246 High Street, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for defendant- appellant

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, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel.

{¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, Obryan DeShawn Chapman, has filed a brief

with this court pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) Butler CA2015-07-140

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.

M. POWELL, P.J., S. POWELL and PIPER, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Chapman, 2016 Ohio 454 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).

2016 Ohio 454 (State v. Chapman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)