State v. Burdett
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v. Burdett, 2004-Ohio-2955.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO. 20189 v. : T.C. NO. 03 CR 1307 TIMOTHY A. BURDETT : (Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court) Defendant-Appellant : : .......... OPINION Rendered on the 4th day of June , 2004. .......... KIRSTEN A. BRANDT, Atty. Reg. No. 0070162, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, 301 W. Third Street, 5th Floor, Dayton, Ohio 45422 Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee DANIEL E. BRINKMAN, Atty. Reg. No. 0025365, 120 W. Second Street, Suite 2000, Dayton, Ohio 45402 Attorney for Defendant-Appellant TIMOTHY A. BURDETT, #A457-172, Chillicothe Correctional Institute, P. O. Box 5500, Chillicothe, Ohio 45601 Defendant-Appellant .......... WOLFF, J. {¶1} Timothy Burdett pleaded no contest to an indicted charge of abduction, a third degree felony, and was found guilty. The court sentenced Burdett to three years 2 imprisonment. {¶2} Burdett appealed and counsel was appointed to prosecute the appeal. On February 12, 2004, Burdett s appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief pursuant to Anders v. California (1967), 386 U.S. 378, wherein he represented to the court that after consideration of the record and the law, he had concluded that there were no potentially meritorious issues to present to this court. {¶3} On February 18, 2004, we informed Burdett by decision and entry that his counsel had filed an Anders brief and of the significance of the Anders brief, and we further invited Burdett to present any pro se assignments of error to this court within sixty days of February 18, 2004. {¶4} We have not received a pro se brief from Burdett. {¶5} Pursuant to our responsibilities under Anders to independently review the record for possibly meritorious appellate issues, we have conducted a thorough review of the record, and, having done so, conclude, as did appointed appellate counsel, that there are no potentially meritorious issues for appellate review and that appeal in this case is frivolous. {¶6} Accordingly, the judgment appealed from will be affirmed. .......... GRADY, J. and YOUNG, J., concur. Copies mailed to: Kirsten A. Brandt Daniel E. Brinkman Timothy A. Burdett Hon. John W. Kessler
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
