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. Moore

December 30, 1996

STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESPONDENT,
v.
REGINALD LAMONT MOORE, APPELLANT.



Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No: 94-1-07587-6. Date filed: 04/24/95. Judge signing: Hon. Sally Pasette.

PER CURIAM. Reginald Moore appeals from the judgment and sentence entered following his plea of guilty to the crime of delivery of a controlled substance (cocaine). Moore'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 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, supra, at 185 quoting Anders v. California, (supra) at 744.

This procedure has been followed. Moore's counsel on appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. A copy of the brief and the motion to withdraw were mailed to Moore at his last known address. In that correspondence, Moore was informed of the right to file a pro se supplemental brief. No supplemental brief has been filed in the case.

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 has independently reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the following potential issue raised by counsel on appeal:

1. Did the trial court err in refusing to permit Moore to withdraw his guilty plea?

The court also raised and considered the following potential issue:

1. Does the statute making it unlawful for Moore to possess a firearm following his conviction unreasonably restrict his constitutional right to bear arms?

These potential issues are wholly frivolous. Nor can we find any other arguable issues of merit in this case. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

19961230 ...


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.