State v. Underwood

Summary

The Ohio First District Court of Appeals considered appointed counsel's Anders no-error brief and motion to withdraw in Dwayne Underwood's appeals from convictions based on guilty pleas. The court identified an arguably meritorious issue concerning whether the trial court's involvement in plea bargaining and modification of Underwood's bond rendered his pleas involuntary. The court granted counsel's withdrawal, appointed new counsel, ordered further briefing, and directed that the appeals be resubmitted.

Holdings

1. When independent review identifies a legal issue arguable on its merits and potentially prejudicial to an indigent appellant, the appellate court may not decide the appeal without ensuring that the appellant has counsel to brief and argue the issue. The court must grant the no-error counsel's motion to withdraw and appoint new counsel for further proceedings.
2. The record contained a legal issue arguable on its merits concerning whether the trial court's involvement in the plea-bargaining process and its modification of Underwood's bond after he rejected the initial plea offer rendered his pleas involuntary. The court did not decide whether the argument would ultimately prevail.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the appellate record contained a nonfrivolous issue concerning whether the trial court's involvement in plea bargaining and modification of Underwood's bond rendered his guilty pleas involuntary.
2. Whether appointed appellate counsel could withdraw under Anders when the record contained a legal issue arguable on its merits and potentially prejudicial to the appellant.

Disposition

other