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. Finklea

March 24, 1997

STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESPONDENT,
v.
ANTHONY FINKLEA, APPELLANT.



Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No: 94-1-07241-9. Date filed: 05/04/95. Judge signing: Hon. Carmen Otero.

PER CURIAM. Anthony Finklea appeals from the judgment and sentence entered following a conviction for delivery of cocaine. Finklea'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.

A motion to withdraw must be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal. *fn1 A copy of the brief should be furnished the indigent, who should be allowed time to raise any points that he or she chooses. *fn2 The court then proceeds to independently review the record to determine whether the appeal is frivolous. *fn3 If the court determines that counsel's brief in support of the motion to withdraw is adequate on its face, it examines only the portions of the record relating to the issues raised in the brief. *fn4

This procedure has been followed. Counsel on appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. Finklea was served with a copy of the brief and informed of a criminal appellant's right to file a supplemental pro se brief. Finklea did not file a supplemental brief. The State filed a response addressing the potential issues identified by appointed counsel.

The facts are accurately set forth in counsel's brief in support of the motion to withdraw. The court reviewed the briefs filed in this court, found appointed counsel's brief adequate on its face, and independently reviewed the pertinent portions of the record. The court specifically considered the following potential issues raised by appellant's counsel and/or appellant:

1. Was evidence of Finklea's prior contact with police inadmissible under ER 404(b)?

2. Did the trial court err in admitting Finklea's prior theft convictions where the only proof of the convictions was a certified copy of the court docket?

3. Did the prosecutor commit misconduct in closing by referring to language in a reasonable doubt instruction that was not given by the court?

4. Is Finklea's conviction supported by sufficient evidence?

The court also raised and considered the following potential issues:

1. Was defense counsel ineffective for failing to object to testimony regarding Finklea's prior contact with police?

The potential issues are wholly frivolous.

Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted and the ...


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.