Cited by

Troutman’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, she found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.

T H O M P S O N, Judge: ¶1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).

H O W E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).

After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Salazar’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), defense counsel has searched the record, found no arguable question of law, and asked that we review the record for reversible error.

Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969), advising this court that after a search of the entire appellate record, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.

J O H N S E N, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was timely filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), following Melody Lorraine Wade’s conviction of disorderly conduct by recklessly handling or displaying a dangerous instrument, a Class 6 felony.

Counsel for Espinoza filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), advising that after searching the record on appeal, he was unable to find any arguable grounds for reversal.

Counsel for Woods filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).

¶2 Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (2000); Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); P.2d 878 (1969), stating that he has searched the record on appeal and found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous.

After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Archuleta’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.

Conner’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), stating that he has searched the record and found no arguable question of law and requesting that this court examine the record for reversible error.

Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (2000); Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); P.2d 878 (1969), stating that he has searched the record on appeal and found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous.

Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.

1 After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Valdespino’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.

Counsel for Gallegos filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) , following Arnulfo Flores’s (“Flores”) conviction of resisting arrest, a class one misdemeanor.

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967)

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), , stating that he has searched the record and found no arguable question of law and requesting that this court examine the record for reversible error.

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967)

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), , advising this court that after a search of the entire record on appeal, he found no arguable ground for reversal.

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); , , this court affirmed the conviction and the sentence imposed.

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967)

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967)

1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), , advising this court that after a search of the entire record he found no arguable ground for reversal.