Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Wilson

December 16, 1996

STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESPONDENT,
v.
CURTIS IRVING WILSON, APPELLANT. STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESPONDENT, V. LINDA WILSON, APPELLANT.



Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No: 93-1-04241-4. Date filed: 01/06/95. Judge signing: Hon. Robert Alsdorf.

Petitions for Review Denied July 8, 1997,

PER CURIAM. Linda and Curtis Wilson appeal from the judgment and sentence entered following their convictions for securities fraud. Their 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 Wash. 2d 184, 470 P.2d 188 (1970) and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (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.

State v. Theobald, 78 Wash. 2d at 185, quoting Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744.

This procedure has been followed. The Wilsons' counsel on appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. The Wilsons were served with a copy of the brief and informed of the right to file a pro se supplemental brief. Both appellants have filed supplemental briefs in the case.

The court has reviewed the briefs filed in this court and has independently reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the following potential issues raised by counsel and/or the appellants:

1. Did the trial court err in denying the Wilsons' motion to allow them to surrender 30 days after sentencing?

2. Should this court release appellants pending appeal?

3. Did the trial court err in finding the defendants knowingly and voluntarily entered their guilty pleas?

4. Are the convictions on some counts invalid because the charging periods were beyond the statute of limitations?

5. Is there a sufficient factual basis to support the court's acceptance of the guilty pleas?

6. Did the trial court err in imposing restitution for counts with an allegedly ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.