State Of Washington, Respondent V. Albert Louis Perreard, Appellant

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent,
v.
ALBERT PERREARD
Appellant.
No. 71163-6-1
DIVISION ONE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
FILED: 	March 9, 2015
en
ZX>
I
WO
O-rj
-n 	'-n
g-or
PER CURIAM. 	Albert Perreard appeals from the judgment and sentence entered
following his conviction for second degree assault by strangulation. 	Perreard'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, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L Ed. 2d
493 (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.
Theobald, 78 Wn.2d at 185 (quoting Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744).
This procedure has been followed. 	Perreard's counsel on appeal filed a brief
with the motion to withdraw. 	Perreard was served with a copy of the brief and informed
of the right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. 	He did not file a
statement of additional grounds for review.

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 the information charging Perreard with assault in the
second degree by strangulation was constitutionally sufficient?
2. 	Whether sufficient evidence supported Perreard's conviction for
assault in the second degree by strangulation?
3. 	Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence of Perreard's prior
conduct as res gestae under ER 404(b)?
4. 	Whether the trial court erred in determining that Perreard knowingly and
voluntarily waived his Miranda rights?
The potential issues are wholly frivolous. Counsel's motion to withdraw is
granted and the appeal is dismissed.
FOR THE COURT:
&
l±Mw