State Of Washington, Respondent V. Wendell Downs, Jr., Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON, 	]
No. 70534-2-1
Respondent,
DIVISION ONE 	o
w 	r-.J 	C/>0
	V . 	fT5 	HC
UNPUBLISHED OPINION 	r f\	
1. -('^'.
WENDELL DOWNS, JR., m
Appellant. 	FILED: 	September 2, 2014
i
Xs 	co rn',
—~ 	"r r"~
KO 	C"~> ""•' *
Per Curiam. Wendell Downs, Jr., appeals from the order of restitution entered^ __;0
o —
after he pleaded guilty to filing a fraudulent insurance claim. 	Down'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, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, 87 S. Ct.
1396 (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 insofar as possible. 	Down's counsel on
appeal filed a brief with the motion to withdraw. 	However, as explained in counsel's
declaration filed in this court, counsel has been unable to locate Downs after being
appointed to represent him. 	Therefore, Downs has not been served with a copy of

No. 70534-2-1 / 2
the brief or informed of the right to file a statement of additional grounds for review.
Accordingly, he did not file a statement of additional grounds.
Nevertheless, 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. Whether substantial evidence supports the order of restitution?
2. Whether Downs was responsible for the full amount of restitution?
The potential issues are wholly frivolous. Counsel's motion to withdraw is
granted and the appeal is dismissed.
For the court:
I t/Aci^y^J