D.A.D. v. State

Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), representing that counsel can make no good faith argument that reversible error occurred, but identifying a technical error *274for correction upon review of this case. Appellant’s counsel requests that the Adjudicatory Order be amended to correctly indicate that D.A.D. was found to have committed only the act described in Count I of the Petition for Delinquency and not “the act(s) described in the Petition” since the State nolle prossed Count II. We agree and remand.

This…