State v. Prosper

733 P.2d 181
Utah Supreme Court·Decided February 13, 1987·No. No. 860290·Published

Opinion

Memorandum of Decision

PER CURIAM:

In 1981, defendant pleaded guilty to forgery, a second degree felony. At sentencing, he was given probation on condition that he pay a $1,000 fine and $402.46 in restitution. When he admitted his noncompliance with these conditions in 1986, his probation was revoked, and he received a reduced sentence of one to five years’ imprisonment.

On appeal from this sentence, defendant’s appointed counsel filed an Anders brief1 and a request to withdraw on the ground that there was no arguable legal issue. Defendant was provided with a copy of the brief filed on his behalf, and no additional arguments or issues have been separately raised by him. He has filed nothing with this Court.

We have carefully reviewed the record below and find no error. Defendant raises no cognizable issue on appeal that is properly supported by the record of the proceedings below. His general claim that he was wrongfully sentenced is without merit. State v. Rodriguez, 718 P.2d 395 (Utah 1986). We conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous and affirm his conviction. In view thereof, we also grant the motion of counsel to withdraw.

Defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed on the merits.

Footnotes

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

State v. Prosper, 733 P.2d 181 (Utah 1987).

733 P.2d 181 (State v. Prosper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
State v. Clayton
639 P.2d 168 (Utah Supreme Court, 1981)
State v. Rodriguez
718 P.2d 395 (Utah Supreme Court, 1986)