State v. Ivory
This text of 2024 Ohio 1400 (State v. Ivory) 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 State v. Ivory, 2024-Ohio-1400.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
WARREN COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, :
Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2024-01-002
: DECISION - vs - 4/15/2024 :
CALVIONTAY DY'WAUN TODD IVORY, :
Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM WARREN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. 23CR40587
David P. Fornshell, Warren County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kirsten A. Brandt, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.
Engel & Martin, LLC, and Joshua A. Engel, for appellant.
Per Curiam.
{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by
appellant, Calviontay Dy'Waun Todd Ivory, the transcript of the docket and journal entries,
the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Warren County Court of
Common Pleas, and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel.
{¶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 Warren CA2024-01-002
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.
S. POWELL, P.J., HENDRICKSON and PIPER JJ., concur.
-2- [Cite as State v. Ivory, 2024-Ohio-1400.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 Ohio 1400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ivory-ohioctapp-2024.