State v. Dorsey
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v. Dorsey, 2007-Ohio-5869.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHO, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. DARRELL DORSEY, Defendant-Appellant. : APPEAL NO. C-070147 TRIAL NOS. B-0603308 B-0700230(A) : D E C I S I O N. : : : Criminal Appeal From: Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas Judgment Appealed From Is: Affirmed Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: November 2, 2007 Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Tanner B. McFall, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-Appellee, Chris McEvilley, for Defendant-Appellant. OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS Please note: This case has been removed from the accelerated calendar. 2 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS SYLVIA S. HENDON, Judge. {¶1} Defendant-appellant Darrell Dorsey pled guilty to failure to comply with a police officer and inducing panic. Dorsey received a sentence of four years imprisonment. {¶2} Pursuant to Anders v. California,1 Dorsey s appointed appellate counsel has advised this court that, after a thorough review of the record, she can find nothing that would arguably support Dorsey s appeal. Counsel has advised Dorsey that she has not found any prejudicial errors and has provided Dorsey with an opportunity to raise any such error for our review. {¶3} Appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Anders, and she now asks us to review the record independently. {¶4} Before accepting Dorsey s guilty pleas, the trial court conducted a detailed Crim.R. 11 colloquy. Dorsey entered his pleas knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. The trial court imposed sentences within the available statutory ranges that were authorized by law. We note that the record indicates that Dorsey wrote a poem to the trial court, and that the trial court responded in kind. In keeping with the spirit of the case, we provide our own verse: Your appeal we consider in detail The record and filings, tis true. We review for mistakes and for error In a quest for full justice for you. Every word that was uttered we ponder Every law that controlled we review. For some detour from fairness unquestioned But alas, we cannot find a clue. 1 (1967), 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396. 3 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS No problem with guilt we uncover No relief from the sentence does cue. We conclude the process untainted And the result was unquestionably due. {¶5} After reviewing the entire record, we hold that it is free from prejudicial error and that it contains no grounds to support a meritorious appeal. The judgment of the trial court is, therefore, affirmed, and appellate counsel s motion to withdraw is overruled. {¶6} Although we conclude that this appeal is frivolous under App.R. 23 and has no reasonable cause under R.C. 2505.35, we refrain from taxing costs and expenses against Dorsey because he is indigent. Judgment affirmed. HILDEBRANDT, P.J., and CUNNINGHAM, J., concur. Please Note: The court has recorded its own entry on the date of the release of this decision. 4
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.
