Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Roderick Monroe, 13-10460 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Number: 13-10460 Visitors: 43
Filed: Aug. 29, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Case: 13-10460 Date Filed: 08/29/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-10460 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 6:12-cr-00100-GKS-TBS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RODERICK MONROE, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (August 29, 2013) Before CARNES,
More
               Case: 13-10460     Date Filed: 08/29/2013    Page: 1 of 2


                                                                [DO NOT PUBLISH]

                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                          FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                            ________________________

                                   No. 13-10460
                               Non-Argument Calendar
                             ________________________

                    D.C. Docket No. 6:12-cr-00100-GKS-TBS-1



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

                                                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                         versus

RODERICK MONROE, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

                                                               Defendant-Appellant.
                            ________________________

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Middle District of Florida
                          ________________________

                                  (August 29, 2013)

Before CARNES, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

      Charles E. Taylor, appointed counsel for Roderick Monroe in this direct

criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant
              Case: 13-10460    Date Filed: 08/29/2013   Page: 2 of 2


and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
, 
87 S. Ct. 1396
, 
18 L. Ed. 2d 493
 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that

counsel=s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,

counsel=s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Monroe’s convictions and

sentences are AFFIRMED.




                                         2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer