Court Opinion

ID: 4238307
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-01-22 22:24:20.092153+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:00.909113
License: Public Domain

[Cite as State v. O'Neill, 2018-Ohio-225.]

                                      IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

                            TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

                                             WARREN COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO,                                     :

        Plaintiff-Appellee,                        :      CASE NO. CA2017-06-089

                                                   :             DECISION
    - vs -                                                        1/22/2018
                                                   :

SEAN P. O'NEILL,                                   :

        Defendant-Appellant.                       :

      CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM WARREN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
                           Case No. 17CR32651

David P. Fornshell, Warren County Prosecuting Attorney, Kristen A. Brandt, 520 Justice
Drive, Lebanon, Ohio 45036, for plaintiff-appellee

Jeffrey W. Stueve, 301 East Silver Street, Lebanon, Ohio 45036, for defendant-appellant

        Per Curiam.

        {¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of

the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the

Warren County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel.

        {¶ 2} Counsel for appellant, Sean P. O'Neill, 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
                                                                       Warren CA2017-06-089

prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be predicated;

(2) lists three potential errors "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.

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

                                              -2-