State v. Crowley

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 1764

Syllabus

Reviewing pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), we conclude that appellate counsel's potential assignments of error are wholly frivolous. There is no suggestion that appellant was unaware of his right to testify at trial, counsel represented that he had spoken to appellant about that right, and the trial court was not required to conduct a hearing regarding appellant's waiver of that right. Defense counsel's failure to move for an acquittal was not ineffective assistance reasonable minds could conclude that the State had proven all the elements of kidnapping and assault on a peace officer. While counsel's failure to renew his claim of prejudicial joinder arguably constituted deficient performance, on this record it would be wholly frivolous to argue that the failure to renew prejudiced appellant in separate trials, the State could have introduced other acts evidence pursuant to Evid.R. 404(B), and the evidence of each crime was simple and direct. It would be wholly frivolous to argue that the trial court abused its discretion by overruling the severance motion. Judgment affirmed.