Filed: Apr. 02, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 13-13274 Date Filed: 04/02/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-13274 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cr-00019-GAP-TBS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DEMETRICES TAVARES MITCHELL, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (April 2, 2014) Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and JORDAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Charles M. Greene, appoi
Summary: Case: 13-13274 Date Filed: 04/02/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-13274 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cr-00019-GAP-TBS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DEMETRICES TAVARES MITCHELL, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (April 2, 2014) Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and JORDAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Charles M. Greene, appoin..
More
Case: 13-13274 Date Filed: 04/02/2014 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-13274
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cr-00019-GAP-TBS-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DEMETRICES TAVARES MITCHELL,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(April 2, 2014)
Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Charles M. Greene, appointed counsel for Demetrices Mitchell in this direct
criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Mitchell
Case: 13-13274 Date Filed: 04/02/2014 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 Mitchell’s convictions and
sentences are AFFIRMED.
2