ORDER AFFIRMING JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE OF THE DISTRICT COURT
MARILYN S. KITE, Chief Justice.
[T1] This matter came before the Court upon the Pro Se Brief of Appellant, which was filed herein December 26, 2012. Appellant entered an Alford guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to possess methamphetamine with intent to deliver. The district court imposed a sentence of 7 to 10 years. Appellant took this appeal. On October 17, 2012, appellants court-appointed appellate counsel filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 788, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the Anders brief submitted by counsel, this Court entered its Order Granting Permission for Court Appointed Counsel to Withdraw, on November 6, 2012. That Order provided that the District Courts Judgment and Sentence would be affirmed unless, on or before December 26, 2012, appellant filed a brief that persuades this Court that the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. In response to this Courts order, Appellant filed his Pro Se Brief of Appellant.
[¶ 2] This Court has carefully reviewed Appellants brief, in which he claims that trial counsel was ineffective. This Court finds that Appellants brief has not provided any reason to conclude that this appeal has merit. With respect to Appellants complaints about trial counsels communication (or lack thereof) and advice, the record does not include evidence to support his factual assertions. Without record support for those claims, the claims lack merit. With respect to Appellants complaints that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to challenge a search warrant and affidavit, this Court sees no merit to Appellants contention that the affidavit was improperly based on the beliefs of the affiant. See Page v. State, 2003 WY 28, T 10, 68 P.3d 904, 910 (Wyo0.2003) (The deficiencies in the affidavit that was used to obtain the search warrant in this case are patent. To begin with, the affidavit states that the affiants personal knowledge is based upon information and belief, the latter standard having long been found wanting in this state. Cordova, 2001 WY 96, 116, 33 P.3d at 149; State v. Peterson, 27 Wyo. 185, 194 P. 342, 348 (1920).) Also, Appellant has not established how he was prejudiced by counsels alleged deficient performance. It is, therefore,
[¶ 3] ORDERED that the District Courts March 16, 2012, Judgment and Sentence be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
[T4] DATED this 16%" day of January, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s) MARILYN S. KITE Chief Justice