State v. Boggs, Unpublished Decision (10-8-2003)
State v. Boggs, Unpublished Decision (10-8-2003)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} Defendant-appellant Edward J. Boggs appeals his conviction for receiving stolen property under R.C.
{¶ 3} On appeal, counsel for Boggs 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 with Anders, independently review the record to determine whether the proceedings below were free from prejudicial error. Counsel, as required by Anders, has given Boggs an opportunity to provide grounds for this appeal, but Boggs has chosen not to do so.
{¶ 4} After reviewing the entire record, we are satisfied that Boggs's counsel has provided Boggs with a diligent and thorough search of the record and that counsel has correctly concluded that the proceedings below were free of prejudicial error. The record reflects that the trial court, pursuant to Crim.R. 11, scrupulously ensured that Boggs's plea was made knowingly and voluntarily. The trial court also made all the appropriate findings on the record and in the written sentencing findings to support the sentence it imposed.
{¶ 5} We conclude that Boggs's appeal is completely without merit and is wholly frivolous. Therefore, we overrule counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
{¶ 6} Although we hold that this appeal is frivolous under App.R. 23 and without "reasonable cause" under R.C.
Doan, P.J., Gorman and Painter, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.