From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Roe

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Twelfth District, Butler
Oct 16, 2023
2023 Ohio 3746 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)

Opinion

CA2023-06-068

10-16-2023

STATE OF OHIO, Appellee, v. JUSTIN SCOTT ROE, Appellant.

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and John C. Heinkel, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Christopher Bazeley, for appellant.


APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. CR2022-04-0503

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and John C. Heinkel, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Christopher Bazeley, for appellant.

DECISION

PER CURIAM

{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by appellant, Justin Scott Roe, 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 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.

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


Summaries of

State v. Roe

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Twelfth District, Butler
Oct 16, 2023
2023 Ohio 3746 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)
Case details for

State v. Roe

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OHIO, Appellee, v. JUSTIN SCOTT ROE, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of Ohio, Twelfth District, Butler

Date published: Oct 16, 2023

Citations

2023 Ohio 3746 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)