APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH
OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 07-862, DIVISION
"A" HONORABLE RAYMOND S. STEIB, JR., JUDGE
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA Paul D.
Connick, Jr. Terry M. Boudreaux
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, JEREMY J. DAVIS Bertha M.
composed of Judges Jude G. Gravois, Robert A. Chaisson, and
Stephen J. Windhorst
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST JUDGE.
appeal, defense counsel concludes that there are no
non-frivolous issues for review, and requests permission to
withdraw. Further, defense counsel requests that this Court
conduct an errors patent review. For the following reasons,
we affirm defendant's convictions and sentences. Further,
we grant defense counsel's motion to withdraw.
& Procedural History
February 7, 2007, defendant, Jeremy Davis, was charged by
bill of information with possession of MDMA and possession of
cocaine. At his arraignment, on March 19, 2007, Mr. Davis
pled not guilty. On September 16, 2016, Mr. Davis entered a
guilty plea to both charges under
Alford and he was sentenced on each count to two
years imprisonment with the Department of Corrections. The
transcript of the trial court's proceedings on the day of
Mr. Davis's plea and sentencing reflects that the
sentences were to run concurrently with one another and with
the sentence imposed in another matter, case number 07-863.
April 11, 2017, Mr. Davis filed an Application for Post
Conviction Relief. On April 17, 2017, the trial court
construed his pleading as a request for an out-of-time
appeal, which it granted. In this appeal, defense counsel
concludes that there are no non-frivolous issues for review,
and requests that this Court conduct an errors patent review.
Davis's convictions were the result of guilty pleas, and,
therefore, the facts underlying the crimes of conviction are
not fully developed in the record. However, during Mr.
Davis's plea colloquy, the State explained that if the
matter proceeded to trial, it would prove that on or about
January 6, 2007, defendant possessed MDMA and cocaine in
the procedure set forth in State v. Benjamin, 573
So.2d 528, 530 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1990), defendant's
appointed appellate counsel has filed an Anders
brief pursuant to 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, 242
(per curiam), asserting that she has thoroughly
reviewed the trial court record and could find no
non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal. Accordingly,
appointed counsel requests permission to withdraw as counsel
Anders, the United States Supreme Court stated that
appointed appellate counsel may request permission to
withdraw if he or she finds the case to be wholly frivolous
after a conscientious examination of it. In State v.
Jyles, the Louisiana Supreme Court explained that an
Anders brief must demonstrate by full discussion and
analysis that appellate counsel "has cast an
advocate's eye over the trial record and considered
whether any ruling made by the trial court, subject to the
contemporaneous objection rule, had a significant, adverse
impact on shaping the evidence presented to the jury for its
consideration." Jyles, 704 So.2d at 241.
appellate court must conduct an independent review of the
trial court record to determine whether the appeal is wholly
frivolous. If, after an independent review, the reviewing
court determines there are no non-frivolous issues for
appeal, it may grant counsel's motion to withdraw and
affirm the defendant's conviction and sentence. However,
if the court finds any legal point arguable on the merits, it
may either deny the motion and order the court-appointed
attorney to file a brief arguing the legal point(s)