APPEAL FROM THE FORTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF
ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 15, 224,
DIVISION "C" HONORABLE J. STERLING SNOWDY, JUDGE
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA Bridget A.
Dinvaut Orenthal J. Jasmin
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, RYAN JOSEPH MODICA Gwendolyn
K. Brown Margaret S. Sollars
composed of Marc E. Johnson, Robert M. Murphy, and Stephen J.
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST JUDGE.
Ryan Joseph Modica, pled guilty to second degree battery, in
violation of La. R.S. 14:34.1. In accordance with a plea
agreement, the trial judge sentenced defendant to four years
with the Department of Corrections and ordered that his
sentence run concurrently with any other sentence he was
serving. This appeal followed. For the following reasons, we
affirm defendant's conviction and sentence.
pled guilty and thus, the facts were not fully developed at
trial. However, in the bill of information, the State alleged
that on or about May 18, 2015, defendant committed a battery
upon Kelvin Jones without his consent with the intention of
inflicting serious bodily injury. Also, during the guilty
plea colloquy, the trial judge questioned defendant
concerning the "factual circumstances surrounding the
battery" and ascertained that defendant on May 18, 2015,
did commit a second degree battery.
the procedure adopted by this Court in State v.
Bradford, 95-929 (La.App. 5 Cir. 6/25/96), 676 So.2d
1108, 1110-11, appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief
asserting that she has thoroughly reviewed the trial court
record and cannot find any non-frivolous issues to raise on
appeal. Accordingly, appointed counsel requests permission to
withdraw as counsel of record.
receiving appellant counsel's brief and motion to
withdraw, this Court performed a full examination of the
entire appellate court record to determine whether the appeal
is frivolous in accordance with Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493
(1967) and State v. Jyles, 96-2669 (La. 12/12/97),
704 So.2d 241 (per curiam).
independent review of the record in this case consisted of
(1) a review of the bill of information to ensure that
defendant was properly charged; (2) a review of all minute
entries to ensure that defendant was present at all crucial
stages of the proceedings and that the conviction and
sentence are legal; and (3) a review of the guilty plea and
sentencing transcript to determine if there was an arguable
basis for ...