State Of Washington, Respondent V. Alex Acevedo, Appellant
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. A.A., B.D. 6/23/94, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 66947-8-I DIVISION ONE UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED: June 4, 2012 Per Curiam. A.A. appeals from an order of disposition entered in juvenile court finding him guilty of second-degree unlawful possession of a firearm. RCW 9.41.040(2)(a)(iii). A.A. s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review. Pursuant to State v. Theobald, 78 Wn.2d 184, 470 P.2d 188 (1970), and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), the motion to withdraw must: [1] be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal. [2] A copy of counsel's brief should be furnished the indigent and [3] time allowed him to raise any points that he chooses; [4] the court--not counsel--then proceeds, after a full examination of all the proceedings, to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous. State v. Theobald, 78 Wn.2d at 185 (quoting Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744). This procedure has been followed insofar as possible. A.A. s counsel on appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. However, as explained in appellate counsel s declaration filed in this court, despite numerous efforts, counsel has been unable to No. 66947-8-I/2 locate A.A. since being appointed to represent him on appeal. Therefore, A.A. has not been served with a copy of counsel s brief or informed of the right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. Accordingly, A.A. has not filed a statement of additional grounds. Nevertheless, the facts are accurately set forth in counsel's brief in support of the motion to withdraw. The court has reviewed the briefs filed in this court and has independently reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the following potential issues raised by counsel: 1. Whether the juvenile court erred in ruling that the firearm was properly seized? 2. Whether the juvenile court erred in admitting A.A. s statements to police officers? 3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish that A.A. was under the age of 18? The potential issues are wholly frivolous. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted and the appeal is dismissed. For the court: 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.
