When can appellate counsel withdraw without providing the Anders brief to the appellant? American Fork v. Large Explained

Background and Facts

Jeramie Large was convicted of two misdemeanor charges in American Fork City’s prosecution. After seeking to appeal his convictions, Large’s appointed appellate counsel conducted a thorough review of the case and determined that no non-frivolous issues existed for appeal. Counsel filed an Anders brief pursuant to Anders v. California and State v. Clayton, requesting permission to withdraw from representation.

Key Legal Issues

The central issue was whether appellate counsel could proceed with an Anders motion to withdraw when unable to provide the appellant with a copy of the brief despite diligent efforts. Under Anders and Clayton, counsel must ordinarily furnish the appellant with a copy of the brief and allow time for the appellant to raise additional points before seeking withdrawal.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Utah Court of Appeals recognized that counsel had made diligent efforts to contact Large at various physical addresses, email addresses, and phone numbers over multiple months without success. The court relied on out-of-state authority, including In re A.S. from Texas and State v. Mayfield from North Carolina, to conclude that the requirement to provide a copy of the brief to the appellant is excused when the appellant cannot be located after diligent efforts. After conducting an independent review, the court determined the appeal was wholly frivolous and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.

Practice Implications

This decision provides important guidance for appellate practitioners handling potentially frivolous appeals. When filing an Anders brief, counsel should meticulously document all attempts to contact the appellant, including specific addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses tried over an extended period. This documentation will be crucial if the appellant cannot be located and counsel seeks to have the brief requirement excused.