State v. Rowland
Opinion
[Cite as State v. Rowland, 2019-Ohio-2679.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
BUTLER COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, :
Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2018-10-206
: DECISION - vs - 7/1/2019 :
CHARLENE ROWLAND, :
Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. CR2017-08-1351
Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Government Services Center, 315 High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for appellee
Michele K. Temmel, 6 South Second Street, #305, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for appellant
Per Curiam.
{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by
appellant, Charlene Rowland, 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 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 Butler CA2018-10-206
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.
HENDRICKSON, P.J., PIPER and M. POWELL, JJ., concur.
-2- Butler CA2018-10-206
-3-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2019 Ohio 2679 (State v. Rowland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.