IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
r.D (S3
c=
STATE OF WASHINGTON, rn
No. 75862-4-1 -11
Respondent, C:, r
c.n rn
=17.
V. DIVISION ONE
c-)
cD
D.V.-D., Jr., UNPUBLISHED OPINION
B.D. 11/16/00,
Appellant. FILED: November 20, 2017
PER CURIAM — D.V.-D., Jr., appeals a juvenile court conviction for First
Degree Attempted Rape of a Child. D.V.-D.'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. D.V.-D's counsel on appeal filed a brief
with the motion to withdraw. D.V.-D. was served with a copy of the brief and
informed of the right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. D.V.-D. did
not file a statement of additional grounds for review.
•
No. 75862-4-1/2
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. Did the trial court abuse its discretion in allowing the State to amend the
information on the day of trial?
2. Did the admission of D.V.-D's statements to officer McKay violate his right
against self-incrimination?
3. Did the trial court abuse its discretion in admitting the victim's child hearsay
statements?
4. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by allowing the State, in anticipation
of an attack on a witness, to bolster that witness's credibility on direct examination?
5. Did prosecutorial misconduct deny D.V.-D. a fair trial?
The potential issues raised by counsel are wholly frivolous. Counsel's motion
to withdraw is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
For the court:
1
)
?-e
MOI
2