What did the appeals court decide?

The court reviewed the case and found no nonfrivolous appellate issues, granted counsel's motion to withdraw under Anders, and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.

Who is affected by this decision?

The appellant, Shiviez Montrel Howard, is affected because his appeal was dismissed and the trial-court judgment remains in place.

What happens next after this dismissal?

The appellate court ordered a mandate sent to the trial court to execute this judgment; any further challenge would require filing appropriate post-conviction or extraordinary relief actions if permitted.

Can this decision be appealed further?

A dismissal of an appeal as frivolous by the intermediate appellate court is typically final as to that appeal; any further review would require filing a timely appeal to the state's highest court or filing other authorized post-conviction remedies.

State v. Howard

Docket CA2025-07-073

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

Criminal AppealDismissed

Filed: Apr 6, 2026 · 3 weeks ago
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Type: Opinion
Case type: Criminal Appeal
Disposition: Dismissed
Citation: State v. Howard, 2026-Ohio-1232
Docket: CA2025-07-073

Appeal from the Butler County Court of Common Pleas following a criminal conviction; review under an Anders brief and motion for counsel to withdraw

Summary

The Court of Appeals reviewed an appeal by Shiviez Montrel Howard from his conviction in Butler County Common Pleas. Counsel filed an Anders brief concluding no nonfrivolous issues exist but identified two potential arguable errors and sought permission to withdraw. The appellate court independently reviewed the record, found no prejudicial error or infringement of appellant's rights, granted counsel's motion to withdraw, and dismissed the appeal as wholly frivolous. The court ordered the trial-court mandate issued and costs taxed to appellant.

Issues Decided

Whether the trial court committed any prejudicial error affecting appellant's constitutional rights during the proceedings below
Whether the potential errors listed in counsel's Anders brief were sufficient to support a nonfrivolous appeal

Court's Reasoning

Counsel filed an Anders brief asserting that after careful review there were no nonfrivolous issues to raise and identified two arguable grounds for appeal. The appellate court independently reviewed the record and determined there were no errors prejudicial to appellant's rights or constitutional violations. Because the court found the appeal wholly frivolous, it granted counsel's motion to withdraw and dismissed the appeal.

Authorities Cited

Anders v. California386 U.S. 738 (1967)
Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure (mandate provision referenced)App.R. 27

Parties

Appellant: Shiviez Montrel Howard
Appellee: State of Ohio
Attorney: Christopher Frederick
Attorney: Michael Greer
Attorney: Michael T. Gmoser
Judge: Robert A. Hendrickson (Presiding Judge)
Judge: Robin N. Piper
Judge: Melena S. Siebert

Key Dates

Appellate decision date: 2026-04-06

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult criminal defense counsel
If appellant wishes to pursue further relief, he should consult counsel promptly to evaluate options such as filing an appeal to the state supreme court (if deadlines permit) or post-conviction motions.
2
Request mandate and trial-court execution details
Obtain certified copies of the appellate judgment and mandate to confirm the trial court has executed the mandate and to determine any outstanding obligations such as sentencing or fines.
3
Consider post-conviction remedies
Discuss with counsel whether any post-conviction relief, such as a motion for leave to file a delayed appeal or a petition for post-conviction relief, might be available based on the record and timing.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the appeals court decide?: The court reviewed the case and found no nonfrivolous appellate issues, granted counsel's motion to withdraw under Anders, and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.
Who is affected by this decision?: The appellant, Shiviez Montrel Howard, is affected because his appeal was dismissed and the trial-court judgment remains in place.
What happens next after this dismissal?: The appellate court ordered a mandate sent to the trial court to execute this judgment; any further challenge would require filing appropriate post-conviction or extraordinary relief actions if permitted.
Can this decision be appealed further?: A dismissal of an appeal as frivolous by the intermediate appellate court is typically final as to that appeal; any further review would require filing a timely appeal to the state's highest court or filing other authorized post-conviction remedies.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

[Cite as State v. Howard, 2026-Ohio-1232.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO

BUTLER COUNTY

:
STATE OF OHIO,
: CASE NO. CA2025-07-073
Appellee,
: DECISION AND
JUDGMENT ENTRY
- vs - : 4/6/2026

:
SHIVIEZ MONTREL HOWARD,
:
Appellant.

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Case No. CR2024-10-1513

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, and Michael Greer, Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Christopher Frederick, for appellant.

____________
DECISION

Per Curiam.

{¶1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal filed by

appellant, Shiviez Montrel Howard, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the

transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Butler County Court of Common

Pleas, and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel.
Butler CA2025-07-073

{¶2} Appellant's counsel has filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), which (1) indicates that a careful review of the record

from the proceedings below fails to disclose any errors by the trial court prejudicial to the

rights of appellant upon which an assignment of error may be predicated; (2) lists two

potential errors "that might arguably support the appeal," Id. at 744; (3) requests that this

court review the record independently to determine whether the proceedings are free from

prejudicial error and without infringement of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests

permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly

frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both the brief and motion to withdraw have been

served upon appellant.

{¶3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response

having been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error

prejudicial to appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel

for appellant requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed

for the reason that it is wholly frivolous.

HENDRICKSON, P.J., PIPER and SIEBERT, JJ., concur.

-2-
Butler CA2025-07-073

JUDGMENT ENTRY

The brief of appellant, filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
properly before this court and having been considered by the court, it is ordered that the
motion of counsel for appellant requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this
appeal is hereby dismissed for the reason that it is wholly frivolous.

It is further ordered that a mandate be sent to the Butler County Common Pleas
Court for execution upon this judgment and that a certified copy of this Decision and
Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27.

Costs to be taxed to appellant.

/s/ Robert A. Hendrickson, Presiding Judge

/s/ Robin N. Piper, Judge

/s/ Melena S. Siebert, Judge

-3-