Opinion
81284-0-I
12-07-2020
STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. BEAU REYNOLDS RICHARDS, Appellant.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Beau Richards challenges his jury conviction pursuant to a guilty plea for failure to register as a sex offender. His court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review. Pursuant to State v. Theobald, 78 Wn.2d 184, 470 P.2d 188 (1970) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the motion to withdraw must:
[1] be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal. [2] A copy of counsel's brief should be furnished the indigent and [3] time allowed him to raise any points that he chooses; [4] the court-not counsel-then proceeds, after a full examination of all the proceedings, to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.Theobald, 78 Wn.2d at 185 (alterations in original) (quoting Anders, 386 U.S. at 744).
This procedure has been followed. Richards' counsel on appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. Richards was served with a copy of the brief and informed of his right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. Richards did not file a supplemental brief.
The material facts are accurately set forth in counsel's brief in support of the motion to withdraw. The court has reviewed the briefs filed in this court and has independently reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the following potential issues raised by counsel: (1) whether the information alleged all of the essential elements of the offense; (2) whether Richards' guilty plea was made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily; (3) whether Richards' attorney was ineffective during the plea process; and (4) whether the sentence imposed was erroneous. The issues raised by counsel are wholly frivolous. The motion to withdraw is granted and the appeal is dismissed.