State v. MacKendrick, 22405 (7-18-2008)
State v. MacKendrick, 22405 (7-18-2008)
Opinion of the Court
{¶ 2} Defendant timely appealed to this court from his conviction and sentence. Defendant's appellate counsel filed an Anders brief,Anders v. California (1967),
{¶ 3} Defendant's appellate counsel has identified one possible issue for appeal, that the trial court abused its *Page 3
discretion with respect to the sentence it imposed. The parties agreed as part of their plea agreement that Defendant's sentence would be within a specific range, not less than five nor more than ten years, on both charges. The sentence imposed by the trial court clearly falls within that agreed upon range, i.e. concurrent terms of ten years for rape and five years for gross sexual imposition. Furthermore, the sentences imposed were authorized by law. The rape charge is a felony of the first degree which carries a prison term of three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or ten years. R.C.
{¶ 4} In addition to reviewing the possible issues for appeal raised by Defendant's appellate counsel, we have conducted an independent review of the trial court's proceedings and have found no error having arguable merit. Accordingly, Defendant's appeal is without merit and the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed. *Page 4
BROGAN, J. And DONOVAN, J., concur.
Copies mailed to:
Carley J. Ingram, Esq.
Mark A. Fisher, Esq.
Matthew Scott Mackendrick
*Page 1Hon. A. J. Wagner
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.