STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. DEMETRIUS CRAIG, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
No. 103020
Court of Appeals of Ohio, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: December 31, 2015
2015-Ohio-5541
BEFORE: Keough, P.J., Boyle, J., and Laster Mays, J.
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION; JUDGMENT: DISMISSED; Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, Case Nos. CR-14-588007-A and CR-15-593290-A
Thomas A. Rein
700 W. St. Clair Avenue, Suite 212
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
Demetrius Craig, pro se
Cuyahoga County Jail
PO Box 5600
Cleveland, OH 44101
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
The Justice Center, 8th Floor
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
{¶1} Defendant-appellant, Dеmetrius Craig, appeals his convictions for attempted felonious assault and having weapons while under disability. Craig’s appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct.1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1997), and now seeks leave to withdraw as counsel. After a thorough review of the record, we grant counsel’s request to withdraw and we dismiss the appeal.
{¶2} In Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-14-588007, Craig was charged with two counts of felonious assault, each of which cоntained a notice of prior conviction and a repeat violent offender specification. He was also indicted under Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-15-593290 for having a weapon while under disability, carrying a concealed weapon, and improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle. The indictment also sought forfeiture of the firearm.
{¶3} Craig entered into a plea agreement with the state where he agreed to plead guilty to attempted felonious assault in CR-14-588007 and having a weapon while under disability, including the attendant forfeiture specification, as charged in CR-15-593290. All other charges in both cases would be dismissed. As part of the plea agreement, Craig agreed to pay as restitution one-third of the medical expenses, with his share not to exceed $3,300, incurred by the victim in CR-14-588007.
{¶4} During sentencing and in open court, thе trial court sentenced Craig on the attempted felonious assault charge in Case No. CR-14-588007. The court ordered that Craig serve 120 days in the county jail, less time served, and three years of community control sanctions, to be served concurrently. However, when the trial cоurt journalized the sentence, it
{¶5} In Case No. CR-15-593290 and in open court, the trial court sеntenced Craig to 180 days in the county jail, less time served, and three years of community control sanctions. However, when the trial court jоurnalized the sentence, it ordered Craig to serve only 120 days in jail, less time served.2 The court also ordered the firearm forfeited. The sentences in both cases were ordered to run concurrently; Craig was appointed appellate counsel.
{¶6} Based on thе belief that no prejudicial error occurred below and that any grounds for appeal would be frivolous, Craig’s appellatе counsel filed a motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct.1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493.
{¶7} Anders outlines the procedure counsel must follow to withdraw as counsel due to the lack of any meritorious grounds for appeal. In Anders, the United States Supreme Court held that if counsel thoroughly reviews the record and concludеs that the appeal is “wholly frivolous,” he may advise the court of that fact and request permission to withdraw from the case. Anders at 744. However, counsel’s request to withdraw must “be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the [a]ppeаl.” Id. Counsel must also furnish a copy of the brief to his client in sufficient time to allow the appellant to file his own brief, pro se. Id.
{¶9} Pursuant to Loc.R. 16(C) and Anders, the appellate court must complete an independent examination of the trial proceedings to determine if any arguably meritorious issues exist. Id.; Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct.1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493.. If the appellate court determines there are no meritorious issues, and the appeal is “wholly frivolous,” it may grant counsel’s request to withdraw and address the merits of the case without affording the appellant the assistancе of counsel. Anders at id. If, however, the court finds the existence of a meritorious issue, it must afford the appellant assistance of cоunsel before deciding the merits of the case. Id.
{¶10} Craig’s appointed counsel states in his Anders brief that he has reviewed the record, including the transcripts of the proceedings, аnd concluded he could find no error by the trial court that is prejudicial to Craig’s rights. Nevertheless, counsel presents one potential issue for our review pursuant to Anders — whether Craig was properly and sufficiently advised of his
{¶11} Under
{¶12} Counsel asserts that the trial court complied with the rеquirements of
{¶13} Accordingly, no meritorious argument could be made that Craig’s plea was not made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. We therefore conclude that Craig’s apрeal is wholly frivolous pursuant to Anders; there is nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s request to withdraw is granted, and thе appeal is dismissed.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, PRESIDING JUDGE
MARY J. BOYLE, J., and
ANITA LASTER MAYS, J., CONCUR