[Cite as State v. Hammond , 2016-Ohio-7027.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT )
STATE OF OHIO Appellee

v. THEODORE HAMMOND Appellant C.A. No. 27793

APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CR 2015 01 0118
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY Dated: September 28, 2016

CARR, Judge. {¶1} Appellant, Theodore Hammond, appeals the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.

I. {¶2} Hammond was convicted of rape and required to register as a sex offender under Megan’s Law. Upon his release from prison, he re ported as required, occasi onally appearing late after receiving a reminder letter. In 2014, he failed to register at his annual anniversary date. He was charged with failing to register, a third-degree felony. He waived his right to a jury trial and, following a bench trial, he was found guilty. Although Hammond argued for community control, and the state sought a sentence of 18 months, the trial court imposed one year of imprisonment. The trial court appointed counsel for appeal. {¶3} Hammond’s appellate co unsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that he has reviewed the record and concluded that there are no2 viable issues to be pursued on appeal. Hamm ond’s counsel has also moved to withdraw as counsel of record in this matter. The record reflects that Hammond was served with a copy of his counsel’s brief, and this Court issued a Magistrate’s Order affording Hammond an opportunity to raise arguments after review of the Anders brief. Hammond ha s not filed a brief on his own behalf. {¶4} Anders cases present a challenge to the ordinary appellate process. When appointed counsel, after a thorough examination of the tr ial court record, is unable to identify any non-frivolous issues, counsel should file an Anders brief. It should go without saying that filing an Anders brief should be a last resort, not a first option. 1 {¶5} We now turn to appellate counsel ’s proposed issues for review.

II. ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
COUNSEL HAS REVIEWED THE RECORD AND TRANSCRIPTS AND CAN SEE NO REVERSIBLE ERROR COMMITTED BY THE TRIAL COURT IN EITHER THE TRIAL OR SENTENCING HEARING.

{¶6} Appellate counsel identified eight issues for review: (1) Whether appellant’s registration oblig ation was properly calculated from start to finish. (2) Whether appellant’s waiver of a jury trial followed strict compliance with R.C. 2945.05 and was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. (3) Whether counsel was ineffe ctive in appellant’s defense. (4) Whether appellant was properly charged and sentenced under Ohio law. (5) Whether the evidence was sufficien t to convict appella nt of the crime charged.

1 Guidelines for drafting an Anders brief are available on this Court’s website at www.ninth.courts.state .oh.us/Anders.htm.3 (6) Whether the manifest weight of the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction of appellant. (7) Whether the statute which appellant was charged under is unconstitutional. (8) Whether the offense constituted Double Jeopardy? {¶7} Appellate counsel’s brie f sets forth the applicable law for each of these issues and addresses the relevant facts. A ppellate counsel concludes that ther e are no issues that were not wholly frivolous. Based on counsel’s analysis of these issues, and this Court’s own full, independent examination of the record, we agree that there are no appealable, non-frivolous issues in this case. See State v. Randles, 9th Dist. Summit No. 23857, 2008–Ohio–662, ¶ 6. We, therefore, grant appellate c ounsel’s motion to withdraw.

III. {¶8} Having reviewed the entire record and having found that no appealable issues exist, this Court concludes that Hammond’s appeal is mer itless and wholly frivolous under Anders. The motion to withdraw filed by Hammond’s counsel is granted. The judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Judgment affirmed.

There were reasonable grounds for this appeal. We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the manda te, pursuant to App.R. 27. Immediately upon the filing hereof, this docum ent shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22 (C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is4 instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30. Costs taxed to Appellant.

DONNA J. CARR FOR THE COURT

HENSAL, P. J. WHITMORE, J. CONCUR.

APPEARANCES: RYAN RAMAGE, Attorney at Law, for Appellant. SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN DIMARTINO, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.