[Cite as State v. Brown, 2014-Ohio-2442.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
TERRANCE D. BROWN
Defendant-Appellant
Appellate Case No. 26002
Trial Court Case No. 2013-CR-634
(Criminal Appeal from
(Common Pleas Court)
...........
OPINION
Rendered on the 6th day of June, 2014.
...........
MATHIAS H. HECK, JR., by CARLEY J. INGRAM, Atty. Reg. No. 0020084, Assistant Prosecuting
Attorney, Montgomery County Prosecutor’s Office, Appellate Division, Montgomery County Courts
Building, P.O. Box 972, 301 West Third Street, Dayton, Ohio 45422
Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee
J. DAVID TURNER, Atty. Reg. No. 0017456, P.O. Box 291771, Kettering, Ohio 45429
Attorney for Defendant-Appellant
TERRANCE D. BROWN, Inmate No. 695-394, 15708 McConnelsville Road, Caldwell, Ohio 43724
Defendant-Appellant
.............
2
WELBAUM, J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Terrance D. Brown, appeals from the decision of the
Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas revoking his community control sanctions and
sentencing him to three years in prison. Brown's appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), wherein he recites
that he has found no potential assignments of error with arguable merit. Thereafter, on February
10, 2014, we notified Brown that his attorney was unable to find any meritorious claims to
present for review. We granted Brown leave to file a pro se brief within sixty days. Brown did
not file a brief. After performing our duty under Anders, to review the record independently, we
also find no meritorious issues for appeal.
{¶ 2} On May 3, 2013, Brown pled guilty to one count of aggravated robbery in
violation of R.C. 2911.01(A)(3), a felony of the first degree; one count of theft in violation of
R.C. 2913.02(A)(1), a felony of the fifth degree; one count of petty theft in violation of R.C.
2913.02(A)(1), a misdemeanor of the first degree; and one count of identity fraud in violation of
R.C. 2913.49(B)(1), a felony of the fifth degree. Following his guilty plea, on June 12, 2013, the
trial court sentenced Brown to community control sanctions for a period not to exceed five years.
One of the general conditions of community control supervision required Brown to attend and
complete programming at the MonDay Community Correctional Institution (“MonDay”).
{¶ 3} On October 10, 2013, a notice of violation of community control was filed with
the court. The notice alleged that Brown had been terminated from MonDay for physically
assaulting another resident. The trial court held an evidentiary hearing on the matter and heard
testimony from MonDay’s assistant clinical manager, Brown’s probation officer, and Brown
3
himself. The testimony revealed that Brown and another MonDay resident began physically
fighting after the resident messed up Brown’s bed. The resident put Brown in a headlock,
which Brown escaped by grabbing the resident’s genitals. After escaping from the headlock,
Brown punched the resident in the face twice. Brown testified that he was merely acting in
self-defense; however, he did not tell this to the MonDay staff during its investigation of the
incident. In addition, the MonDay staff did not conclude that Brown’s actions were limited to
self-defense.
{¶ 4} After the evidentiary hearing, the trial court did not find Brown’s self-defense
argument credible and determined that he violated the conditions of his community control
sanctions. Accordingly, the trial court revoked Brown’s community control sanctions and
sentenced him to three years in prison for aggravated robbery, twelve months in prison for each
count of theft and identity fraud, and six-months in prison for petty theft. All of his sentences
were ordered to run concurrently for a total prison term of three years.
{¶ 5} Brown filed a notice of appeal from the trial court's decision revoking his
community control and sentencing him to three years in prison. Thereafter, his appellate
counsel filed an Anders brief indicating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal.
Counsel did not raise any potential assignments of error for our review.
{¶ 6} In Anders cases we are charged with conducting a thorough examination of the
record to determine "whether any issues involving potentially reversible error that are raised by
appellate counsel or by a defendant in his pro se brief are ‘wholly frivolous.’ * * * If we find that
any issue presented or which an independent analysis reveals is not wholly frivolous, we must
appoint different appellate counsel to represent the defendant." (Citation omitted.) State v.
4
Marbury, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 19226, 2003-Ohio-3242, ¶ 7. An appeal is frivolous if it
"presents issues lacking in arguable merit. * * * An issue lacks arguable merit if, on the facts and
law involved, no responsible contention can be made that it offers a basis for reversal." (Citation
omitted.) Id. at ¶ 8.
{¶ 7} Pursuant to our responsibilities under Anders, we have conducted an independent
review of the record and, having done so, we find no meritorious issues to present on appeal
regarding the trial court’s decision revoking Brown’s community control and sentencing him to
three years in prison. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
.............
DONOVAN and HALL, JJ., concur.
Copies mailed to:
Mathias H. Heck
Carley J. Ingram
J. David Turner
Terrance D. Brown
Hon. Mary Katherine Huffman