Filed: Dec. 02, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED _ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 10-10578 DEC 02, 2010 Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY CLERK _ D.C. Docket No. 8:09-cr-00349-JSM-TGW-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, llllllllll lllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PASCUAL GARNICA, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (December 2, 2010) Before BARKETT, MARCUS and AN
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED _ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 10-10578 DEC 02, 2010 Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY CLERK _ D.C. Docket No. 8:09-cr-00349-JSM-TGW-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, llllllllll lllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PASCUAL GARNICA, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (December 2, 2010) Before BARKETT, MARCUS and AND..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-10578 DEC 02, 2010
Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY
CLERK
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:09-cr-00349-JSM-TGW-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
llllllllll lllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PASCUAL GARNICA,
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(December 2, 2010)
Before BARKETT, MARCUS and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Daniel L. Castillo, appointed counsel for Pascual Garnica in this direct
criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the
appellant and filed a brief prepared 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 Garnica’s
conviction and sentence under Count One are AFFIRMED.
2