Filed: Sep. 26, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Case: 13-10402 Date Filed: 09/26/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-10402 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cr-00526-EAK-AEP-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LAVONE DENISE JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (September 26, 2013) Before MARCUS, HILL and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Walter Grantham, appointed coun
Summary: Case: 13-10402 Date Filed: 09/26/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-10402 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cr-00526-EAK-AEP-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LAVONE DENISE JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (September 26, 2013) Before MARCUS, HILL and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Walter Grantham, appointed couns..
More
Case: 13-10402 Date Filed: 09/26/2013 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-10402
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cr-00526-EAK-AEP-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LAVONE DENISE JOHNSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(September 26, 2013)
Before MARCUS, HILL and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Walter Grantham, appointed counsel for Lavone Denise Johnson in this
direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the
Case: 13-10402 Date Filed: 09/26/2013 Page: 2 of 2
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 Johnson’s conviction and
sentence are AFFIRMED.
2