Ronald Dale Anderson v. State
2016 WY 95
| Wyo. | 2016Background
- Appellant Ronald Dale Anderson pleaded guilty (unconditional) to two counts of sexual abuse of a minor in the third degree pursuant to a plea agreement.
- District court sentenced Anderson to concurrent 10–15 year terms on each count.
- Appellant appealed the judgment and sentence; appellate counsel filed an Anders motion to withdraw, asserting no nonfrivolous issues.
- This Court granted time for a pro se brief; Anderson did not file any pro se brief.
- The Court reviewed the record and Anders brief, concluded further briefing unnecessary, and affirmed the district court judgment and sentence.
- The Court ordered correction of clerical errors in charging documents (wrong statutory subsection listed for one count) and clarified fee imposition to be per case, not per count, consistent with Hawes v. State.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate counsel may withdraw under Anders | State: counsel followed procedure; no substantive challenge to judgment. | Anderson: (through counsel/complaint) raised unspecified complaints but no pro se brief filed. | Withdrawal granted; Anders motion accepted despite brief not detailing potential issues because case not complex. |
| Sufficiency of Anders brief/search of record | State: counsel stated no prejudicial error identified. | Anderson: asserted complaints (not fleshed out); no pro se brief. | Court found counsel did not fully cite all arguable record points but concluded case not so complex as to require more briefing and affirmed. |
| Clerical error in charging documents (wrong statute subsection) | State: record shows the plea and transcript reflect correct statute for BC count. | Anderson: clerical misstatements in Amended Felony Information, Judgment, Sentence. | Court ordered remand to district court to correct clerical errors under W.R.Cr.P. 36. |
| Imposition of Judicial Systems Automation and Indigent Civil Legal Services fees per count vs per case | State: sentence document controls; fees should be per case per this Court’s precedent. | Anderson: district court orally pronounced fees on each count. | Court held written sentence controls; fees imposed per case (not per count) consistent with Hawes v. State and adjusted accordingly. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural requirements when appointed counsel seeks to withdraw on appeal)
- United States v. Marvin, 211 F.3d 778 (3d Cir. 2000) (counsel must indicate any record matters that might arguably support the appeal)
- Hawes v. State, 368 P.3d 879 (Wyo. 2016) (fees such as Judicial Systems Automation and Indigent Civil Legal Services are imposed per case, not per count)