Narrative Opinion Summary
Ronald Edward Ballinger was convicted of indecency with a child by contact after pleading guilty and judicially confessing to the offense. The district court sentenced him to eight years of imprisonment. His court-appointed attorney submitted a brief characterizing the appeal as frivolous and without merit, complying with the standards set forth in Anders v. California. The brief included a thorough evaluation of the record, indicating no viable grounds for appeal. Ballinger was provided with a copy of the brief and informed of his right to review the appellate record and submit a pro se brief; however, he did not file one. After reviewing the record and the attorney's brief, the court agreed that the appeal lacked merit, granted the attorney's motion to withdraw, and affirmed the conviction. The ruling was made by Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith, and Puryear, and was filed on October 2, 2003.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Conviction when Appeal Lacks Meritsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Upon reviewing the record and the attorney's brief, the appellate court agreed that the appeal lacked merit and affirmed the conviction.
Reasoning: After reviewing the record and the attorney's brief, the court agreed that the appeal lacked merit, granted the attorney's motion to withdraw, and affirmed the conviction.
Anders Brief Standardsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court-appointed attorney submitted a brief characterizing the appeal as frivolous and without merit, following the Anders v. California guidelines.
Reasoning: His court-appointed attorney submitted a brief characterizing the appeal as frivolous and without merit, complying with the standards set forth in Anders v. California.
Right to Pro Se Briefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Ballinger was informed of his right to review the appellate record and submit a pro se brief, which he did not exercise.
Reasoning: Ballinger was provided with a copy of the brief and informed of his right to review the appellate record and submit a pro se brief; however, he did not file one.