State v. Richardson

2024 Ohio 2530

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: July 1, 2024
• Docket: CA2024-02-008
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Richardson, 2024-Ohio-2530.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

CLERMONT COUNTY

: STATE OF OHIO, : CASE NO. CA2024-02-008 Appellee, : DECISION 7/1/2024 - vs - :

: JON E. RICHARDSON, : Appellant.

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLERMONT COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT Case No. 2023-CRB-03675

Mark J. Tekulve, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, and Nicholas Horton, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

W. Stephen Haynes, Clermont County Public Defender, and Robert F. Benintendi, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Per Curiam.

{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by

appellant, Jon E. Richardson, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the

transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Clermont County Municipal Court,

and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel. Clermont CA2024-02-008

{¶2} Appellant's counsel has filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (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 two

potential errors "that might arguably support the appeal," Anders at 744; (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 BYRNE, JJ., concur.