State v. Hoffert, Unpublished Decision (11-13-2002)
State v. Hoffert, Unpublished Decision (11-13-2002)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} Defendant-appellant Theodore Hoffert appeals the judgment of the trial court convicting him of telephone harassment in violation of R.C.
{¶ 3} On appeal, counsel for Hoffert has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,1 stating that counsel has conscientiously reviewed the record and can discern no reversible errors in the trial proceedings. Consequently, counsel has sought to withdraw from representation and requests that this court, consistent withAnders, independently review the record to determine whether the proceedings below were free from prejudicial error. Counsel, as required by Anders, has also given Hoffert an opportunity to file his own brief, but he has not done so.
{¶ 4} After reviewing the entire record, we are satisfied that Hoffert's counsel has provided her client with a diligent and thorough search of the record and that she has correctly concluded that the proceedings below were free of prejudicial error. We conclude that no meritorious issues exist for appeal and that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
{¶ 5} Although we hold that this appeal is frivolous under App.R. 23 and without "reasonable cause" under R.C.
{¶ 6} Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24.
Painter, P.J., Sundermann and Winkler, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.