State v. Foster

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v. Foster, 2018-Ohio-4561.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO BUTLER COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellee, : : CASE NO. CA2017-07-108 : AMENDED DECISION ON REOPENING 11/13/2018 - vs : RODNEY DWAYNE FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant. : : CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. CR2016-01-0083 Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Government Services Center, 315 High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for plaintiff-appellee Rodney Dwayne Foster, #A726786, London Correctional Institution, 1580 State Route 56 SW, London, Ohio 43140, defendant-appellant, pro se Per Curiam. {¶ 1} This cause is before the court after the appeal was reopened pursuant to an App.R. 26(B) application filed by appellant. Appellant's application to reopen was granted on the basis that appellant was not informed that he could file a pro se brief after his counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967). {¶ 2} Appellant has now filed a pro se brief and the case has been considered upon Butler CA2017-07-108 a notice of appeal, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Butler County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a no error brief previously filed by appellant's counsel and appellant's pro se brief. {¶ 3} Appellant's pro se brief raises four assignments of error pertaining to ineffectiveness of trial counsel, ineffectiveness of appellate counsel, withholding of exculpatory evidence by the prosecutor, and appellant's lack of culpability in the victim's death. {¶ 4} We have accordingly examined the record and considered the arguments raised in counsel's brief and in appellant's pro se brief and find no error prejudicial to appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for the reason that it is wholly frivolous. S. POWELL, P.J., PIPER and M. POWELL, 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.