State v. Riehle
2017 Ohio 9095
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Defendant-appellant Shawntay Maricisa (aka Shawntey M.) Riehle appealed a criminal conviction from the Butler County Court of Common Pleas (Case No. CR2015-09-1361).
- Appellant's counsel filed an Anders brief stating no non-frivolous issues were found but identifying four potential arguable errors and seeking permission to withdraw.
- Counsel certified service of the Anders brief and motion to withdraw on appellant; the court afforded appellant time to respond and received none.
- The appellate court independently reviewed the record, the docket, transcripts, and original papers from the trial court.
- The court found no prejudicial error or constitutional infringement in the trial proceedings and concluded the appeal was wholly frivolous.
- The court granted counsel's motion to withdraw and dismissed the appeal; a mandate was ordered to the trial court and costs taxed per App.R. 24.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate counsel properly complied with Anders when seeking to withdraw | The State did not oppose withdrawal; primary focus on record review to ensure no reversible error | Riehle (through counsel) contended no non-frivolous issues exist and counsel identified potential arguable errors in an Anders brief | Court held counsel complied with Anders and independent review revealed no prejudicial error; withdrawal granted and appeal dismissed as frivolous |
| Whether any trial-court errors prejudiced Riehle's rights | Government maintained the record shows no prejudicial error | Counsel flagged four potential errors as arguable but ultimately concluded none justified appeal | Court held none of the potential errors warranted reversal |
| Whether appellant received adequate notice and opportunity to respond to counsel's motion to withdraw | State implicitly maintained procedural adequacy by allowing time for response | Riehle received a copy of the brief and had time to respond but did not do so | Court noted appellant was given sufficient time and filed no response |
| Whether the appeal should be dismissed and mandate issued | State requested dismissal as frivolous and issuance of mandate | Riehle sought appellate review but counsel concluded appeal frivolous | Court dismissed appeal as wholly frivolous, granted withdrawal, and ordered mandate and taxation of costs |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural requirement when counsel believes appeal is frivolous)