State v. Suttles, Unpublished Decision (12-15-2004)
This text of State v. Suttles, Unpublished Decision (12-15-2004) (State v. Suttles, Unpublished Decision (12-15-2004)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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
As part of a plea agreement, defendant-appellant Kevin Suttles entered a guilty plea to two counts of trafficking in cocaine, first-degree felonies, in violation of R.C.
Pursuant to Anders v. California,1 Suttles's appointed appellate counsel has advised this court that, after a thorough review of the record, he can find nothing that would arguably support Suttles's appeal. Appellate counsel has notified Suttles of his conclusion and has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel.2
Appellate counsel now requests that this court independently examine the record for prejudicial error pursuant to Anders. We have done so, and we concur in appellate counsel's conclusion that there is no prejudicial error. The judgment of the trial court is, accordingly, affirmed.
Although we conclude that this appeal is frivolous pursuant to App. R. 23 and is without "reasonable cause" under R.C.
Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App. R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App. R. 24.
Hildebrandt, P.J., Painter and Sundermann, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Suttles, Unpublished Decision (12-15-2004), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-suttles-unpublished-decision-12-15-2004-ohioctapp-2004.