State v. Young, Unpublished Decision (11-22-2006)
State v. Young, Unpublished Decision (11-22-2006)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} We permitted Young to file a late appeal and the trial court appointed counsel to prosecute the appeal. On August 14, 2006, appointed appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant toAnders v. California (1967),
{¶ 3} Appointed appellate counsel identified two possible appellate issues: The court's failure to advise Young of his appellate rights and his trial counsel's failure to pursue an appeal. Counsel concluded, and we agree, that these are not viable appellate issues because an appeal has been allowed in this case. Pursuant to our responsibilities under Anders, we have undertaken an independent review of the record in this case, and we have concluded, as did appointed appellate counsel, that there are no potentially meritorious issues for appellate review and that this appeal is entirely frivolous. Accordingly, the judgment will be affirmed.
Grady, P.J. and Donovan, J., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.