Opinion
CASE NO. CA2018-05-026
04-15-2019
STATE OF OHIO, Appellee, v. EUGENE E. COX, Appellant.
D. Vincent Faris, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas Horton, 76 South Riverside Drive, 2nd Floor, Batavia, Ohio 45103, for appellee W. Stephen Haynes, Clermont County Public Defender, Robert F. Benintendi, 302 East Main Street, Batavia, Ohio 45103, for appellant Eugene E. Cox, #A-743489, Madison Correctional Institution, 1851 State Route 56, London, Ohio 43140, appellant, pro se
DECISION
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM CLERMONT COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Case No. 2018 CR 00019 D. Vincent Faris, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas Horton, 76 South Riverside Drive, 2nd Floor, Batavia, Ohio 45103, for appellee W. Stephen Haynes, Clermont County Public Defender, Robert F. Benintendi, 302 East Main Street, Batavia, Ohio 45103, for appellant Eugene E. Cox, #A-743489, Madison Correctional Institution, 1851 State Route 56, London, Ohio 43140, appellant, pro se Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by appellant Eugene E. Cox, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Clermont County Court of Common Pleas, and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel and appellant's pro se brief.
{¶ 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 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} Appellant has filed a pro se brief raising one assignment of error pertaining to the 30-month sentence he received.
{¶ 4} We have accordingly examined the record, the potential assignment of error presented in counsel's brief, and the assignment of error in appellant's pro se brief, 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., RINGLAND and PIPER, JJ., concur.