Thursday, May 24, 2012

Summary 2012 WY 73

Summary of Decision May 24, 2012

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court

Case Name: Marvin Kenneth Shue v. The State of Wyoming

Docket Number: S-11-0201


Date of Order: May 24, 2012

This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. Appellant pled guilty to one count of sexual abuse of a minor in the first degree. This is Appellant’s direct appeal from that conviction. On March 5, 2012, Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a “Motion to Withdraw as Counsel,” pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the “Anders brief” submitted by counsel, this Court, on March 27, 2012, entered its “Order Granting Permission for Court Appointed Counsel to Withdraw.” That Order notified Appellant that the District Court’s June 2, 2011 “Judgment and Sentence” would be affirmed unless, on or before May 11, 2012, Appellant filed a brief that persuaded this Court that the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. Taking note that Appellant, Marvin Kenneth Shue, has not filed a brief or other pleading within the time allotted, the Court finds that the district court’s “Judgment and Sentence” should be affirmed. It is therefore ordered that the District Court’s June 2, 2011 “Judgment and Sentence” be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

No comments:

Check out our tags in a cloud (from Wordle)!