Filed: Dec. 08, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS U.S. _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT DEC 08, 2010 No. 10-10329 JOHN LEY Non-Argument Calendar CLERK _ D.C. Docket No. 2:02-cr-00374-LSC-TMP-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MICHAEL GLENN BOLE, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _ (December 8, 2010) Before TJOFLAT, HULL and
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS U.S. _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT DEC 08, 2010 No. 10-10329 JOHN LEY Non-Argument Calendar CLERK _ D.C. Docket No. 2:02-cr-00374-LSC-TMP-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MICHAEL GLENN BOLE, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _ (December 8, 2010) Before TJOFLAT, HULL and M..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
U.S.
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
DEC 08, 2010
No. 10-10329 JOHN LEY
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:02-cr-00374-LSC-TMP-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL GLENN BOLE,
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Alabama
________________________
(December 8, 2010)
Before TJOFLAT, HULL and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
James L. O’Kelley, appointed counsel for Michael Glenn Bole, filed a
motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by 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 Bole’s revocation of supervised release and sentence are AFFIRMED.
2