Ryan J. Pias v. The State of Wyoming

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING 2013 WY 108 April Term, A.D. 2013 September 18, 2013 RYAN J. PIAS, Appellant (Defendant), v. S-13-0062 THE STATE OF WYOMING, Appellee (Plaintiff). ORDER AFFIRMING THE DISTRICT COURT S ORDER ON PROBATION REVOCATION AND ORDER OF INCARCERATION This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. In 2010, Appellant pled guilty to one count of delivery of marijuana. The district court imposed a four to eight year sentence, which was suspended in favor of five years of supervised probation. In February of 2013, the district court revoked Appellant s probation and imposed the underlying sentence. Appellant filed this appeal to challenge the district court s Order on Probation Revocation and Order of Incarceration. On July 1, 2013, Appellant s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the Anders brief submitted by appellate counsel, this Court, on July 23, 2013, entered its Order Granting Permission for Court Appointed Counsel to Withdraw. That Order notified Appellant that the district court s Order on Probation Revocation and Order of Incarceration would be affirmed unless, on or before September 9, 2013, Appellant filed a brief that persuaded this Court that the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. Taking note that Appellant, Ryan J. Pias, has not filed a brief or other pleading within the time allotted, the Court finds that the district court s Order on Probation Revocation and Order of Incarceration should be affirmed. It is, therefore, [¶1] [¶2] ORDERED that the district court s February 14, 2013, Order on Probation Revocation and Order of Incarceration be, and the same hereby is, affirmed. [¶3] DATED this 18th day of September, 2013. BY THE COURT: /s/ MARILYN S. KITE Chief Justice

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.