In re S.R.P.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as In re S.R.P., 2015-Ohio-3107.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO CLINTON COUNTY IN THE MATTER OF: S.R.P. : : CASE NO. CA2015-02-003 : DECISION 8/3/2015 : : APPEAL FROM CLINTON COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS JUVENILE DIVISION Case No. 20133005 Kim Vandervort, 555 Todds Ridge Road, Wilmington, Ohio 45177, Guardian Ad Litem Richard W. Moyer, Clinton County Prosecuting Attorney, 103 East Main Street, Wilmington, Ohio 45177, for appellee William Chad Randolph, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, 1025 South South Street, Wilmington, Ohio 45177, for appellee Rose & Dobyns Co., LPA, Blaise S. Underwood, 97 North South Street, Wilmington, Ohio 45177, for appellant, B.P. Peterson Law Offices, Shaun Peterson, 116 North Walnut Street, Wilmington, Ohio 45177, for defendant, E.P. Buckley, Miller, Wright & Raizk, Lauren Raizk, 145 North South Street, Wilmington, Ohio 45177, for attorney for child Per Curiam. {¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Clinton CA2015-02-003 Clinton County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel. {¶ 2} Counsel for appellant, B.P., has filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) indicates that a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any errors by the trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be predicated; (2) lists one potential error "that might arguably support the appeal," Anders, at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently to determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant. {¶ 3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appellant requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason that it is wholly frivolous. M. POWELL, P.J., S. POWELL and RINGLAND, JJ., concur. -2-
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.
