State v. Simms

2026 Ohio 396
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 9, 2026
DocketCA2025-06-043
StatusPublished

This text of 2026 Ohio 396 (State v. Simms) 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.

Bluebook
State v. Simms, 2026 Ohio 396 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Simms, 2026-Ohio-396.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

WARREN COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO, :

Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2025-06-043

: DECISION AND - vs - JUDGMENT ENTRY : 2/9/2026

JESSICA D. SIMMS, :

Appellant. :

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM WARREN COUNTY COURT Case No. 2025CRB000144

David P. Fornshell, Warren County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kirsten A. Brandt, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

The Helbling Law Firm, LLC, and John J. Helbling, for appellant.

_ _ DECISION

Per Curiam.

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

appellant, Jessica D. Simms, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript Warren CA2025-06-043

of proceedings and original papers from the Warren County Court, 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 (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 one

potential error "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.

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

-2- Warren CA2025-06-043

_ ______________ JUDGMENT ENTRY

The brief of appellant, filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), properly before this court and having been considered by the court, it is ordered that the motion of counsel for appellant requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is hereby dismissed for the reason that it is wholly frivolous.

It is further ordered that a mandate be sent to the Warren County Court for execution upon this judgment and that a certified copy of this Decision and Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27.

Costs to be taxed to appellant.

/s/ Matthew R. Byrne, Presiding Judge

/s/ Robin N. Piper, Judge

/s/ Mike Powell, Judge

-3-

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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2026 Ohio 396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-simms-ohioctapp-2026.