State v. Prosper
State v. Prosper
Opinion of the Court
Memorandum of Decision
In 1981, defendant pleaded guilty to forgery, a second degree felony. At sentencing, he was given probation on condition that he pay a $1,000 fine and $402.46 in restitution. When he admitted his noncompliance with these conditions in 1986, his probation was revoked, and he received a reduced sentence of one to five years’ imprisonment.
On appeal from this sentence, defendant’s appointed counsel filed an Anders brief
We have carefully reviewed the record below and find no error. Defendant raises no cognizable issue on appeal that is properly supported by the record of the proceedings below. His general claim that he was wrongfully sentenced is without merit. State v. Rodriguez, 718 P.2d 395 (Utah 1986). We conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous and affirm his conviction. In view thereof, we also grant the motion of counsel to withdraw.
Defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed on the merits.
. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Clayton, 639 P.2d 168 (Utah 1981).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- STATE of Utah, and v. Peter L. PROSPER, and
- Status
- Published