Filed: Sep. 25, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Case: 12-15584 Date Filed: 09/25/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-15584 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:09-cr-20673-DLG-23 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTHUR SMITH, a.k.a Co-Chief, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (September 25, 2013) Before DUBINA, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-15584 Date F
Summary: Case: 12-15584 Date Filed: 09/25/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-15584 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:09-cr-20673-DLG-23 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTHUR SMITH, a.k.a Co-Chief, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (September 25, 2013) Before DUBINA, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-15584 Date Fi..
More
Case: 12-15584 Date Filed: 09/25/2013 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-15584
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:09-cr-20673-DLG-23
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ARTHUR SMITH,
a.k.a Co-Chief,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(September 25, 2013)
Before DUBINA, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-15584 Date Filed: 09/25/2013 Page: 2 of 2
Philip R. Horowitz, counsel for Arthur Smith in this direct criminal appeal,
has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant 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 Smith’s conviction and sentence are
AFFIRMED.
2