Filed: Dec. 20, 2010
Latest Update: Dec. 20, 2010
Summary: UNPUBLISHED OPINION PER CURIAM. Joseph Thurura appeals from the judgment and sentence entered on his conviction for second degree rape. Thurura's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review. Pursuant to State v. Theobald , 78 Wn.2d 184 , 470 P.2d 188 (1970) and Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), the motion to withdraw must: [1] be accompanied by a brief referri
Summary: UNPUBLISHED OPINION PER CURIAM. Joseph Thurura appeals from the judgment and sentence entered on his conviction for second degree rape. Thurura's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review. Pursuant to State v. Theobald , 78 Wn.2d 184 , 470 P.2d 188 (1970) and Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), the motion to withdraw must: [1] be accompanied by a brief referrin..
More
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Joseph Thurura appeals from the judgment and sentence entered on his conviction for second degree rape. Thurura's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review. Pursuant to State v. Theobald, 78 Wn.2d 184, 470 P.2d 188 (1970) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), the motion to withdraw must:
[1] be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal. [2] A copy of counsel's brief should be furnished the indigent and [3] time allowed him to raise any points that he chooses; [4] the court—not counsel—then proceeds, after a full examination of all the proceedings, to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.
Theobald, 78 Wn.2d at 185 (quoting Anders, 386 U.S. at 744).
This procedure has been followed. Thurura's counsel on appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. Thurura was served with a copy of the brief and informed of his right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. He has not filed a pro se statement of additional grounds.
The facts are accurately set forth in counsel's brief in support of the motion to withdraw. The court has reviewed the briefs filed in this court and independently reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the following potential issues raised by counsel:
1. Was there sufficient evidence to support the conviction?
2. Did Thurura make a knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of his right to a jury trial?
The issues raised by his appellate counsel are wholly frivolous. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
COX, and SPEARMAN, JJ., concur.
