APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH
OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 15-2880, DIVISION
"L" HONORABLE DONALD A. ROWAN, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA Paul D.
Connick, Jr., Terry M. Boudreaux
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, GLENN LAWRENCE A.K.A.
MICHAEL MCCOY Glenn Lawrence, Bruce G. Whittaker
composed of Judges Fredericka Homberg Wicker, Stephen J.
Windhorst, and Hans J. Liljeberg
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST, JUDGE
appeal, defendant's appointed appellate counsel filed an
Anders brief on defendant's behalf asserting
that there is no basis for a non-frivolous appeal. Defendant,
Glenn Lawrence, filed a pro se supplemental brief
arguing four assignments of error. For the reasons that
follow, we affirm defendant's conviction and sentence. We
further grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw as
attorney of record.
15, 2015, the Jefferson Parish District Attorney filed a bill
of information charging defendant, Glenn Lawrence a/k/a
Michael McCoy, with home invasion, in violation of La. R.S.
14:62.8. On May 18, 2015, defendant pled not guilty.
26, 2016, defendant withdrew his plea of not guilty and pled
guilty as charged. The trial court sentenced defendant to
imprisonment at hard labor for fifteen years to run
concurrently with his sentences in case numbers 08-1966,
14-3654, 16-0184 and concurrently with the "parole
time" in case numbers 95-5681, 95-5900, and
May10, 2018, defendant filed a "Notice of Intent to
Appeal and 30 Day Extension to File." On May 14, 2018,
the trial court granted defendant an out-of-time appeal. This
defendant pled guilty, the underlying facts were not fully
developed at a trial. A factual basis was not provided at the
guilty plea proceeding, therefore, the facts have been
gleaned from the bill of information which provided that on
or about May 26, 2013, in Jefferson Parish, defendant
violated La. R.S. 14:62.8 "in that he commit
[sic] unauthorized enter [sic] of any
inhabited dwelling, or other structure belonging to another
and used in whole or in part as a home or place of abode by a
person, where a person is present, with the intent to use
force or violence upon the person of another or to vandalize,
deface, or damage the property of another."
the procedure adopted by this Court in State v.
Bradford, 95-929 (La.App. 5 Cir. 06/25/96), 676 So.2d
1108, 1110-1111,  appointed appellate counsel has filed a
brief asserting that he has thoroughly reviewed the trial
court record and cannot find any non-frivolous issues to
raise on appeal. Accordingly, 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 (per curiam), appointed appellate
counsel requests permission to withdraw as attorney of record
conducting a review for compliance with Anders, an
appellate court must conduct an independent review of the
record to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous.
Bradford, 676 So.2d at 1110. 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. Id.
case, defendant's appellate counsel has complied with the
procedures for filing an Anders brief.
Defendant's counsel asserts that after a conscientious
and thorough review of the trial court record, he could find
no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal. Appellate counsel
indicates that defendant pled guilty and was sentenced
pursuant to a counseled plea agreement and no rulings were
preserved for appeal under State v. Crosby, 338
So.2d 584 (La. 1976). He asserts that defendant entered an
unqualified guilty plea waiving all non-jurisdictional
defects. Appellate counsel indicates that defendant did not
object to (1) the charged offense during the plea proceeding;
(2) the trial court's acceptance of the guilty plea; or
(3) the sentence agreed upon and imposed. Therefore, he
asserts that defendant waived his right to now seek review on
direct appeal. Appellant counsel also asserts that the
sentence imposed was in conformity with the plea agreement,
and thus, defendant is precluded from raising a claim of
excessiveness on appeal. He further contends that the plea
agreement was "somewhat advantageous" to defendant
in that he did not receive the maximum sentence and the trial
court did not order any of his sentences to run
consecutively. Defendant's appellate counsel filed a
motion requesting permission to withdraw as attorney of
Court has performed an independent, thorough review of the
pleadings, minute entries, bill of information, and
transcripts in the appellate record. Our review of the record
supports appellate counsel's ...