Filed: Apr. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 12-14765 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-14765 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 3:12-cr-00034-WHA-TFM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANTHONY LAMAR WINSTON, a.k.a. June Boy, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama _ (April 16, 2014) Before HULL, MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM: Thomas Goggans, a
Summary: Case: 12-14765 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-14765 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 3:12-cr-00034-WHA-TFM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANTHONY LAMAR WINSTON, a.k.a. June Boy, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama _ (April 16, 2014) Before HULL, MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM: Thomas Goggans, ap..
More
Case: 12-14765 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-14765
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 3:12-cr-00034-WHA-TFM-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ANTHONY LAMAR WINSTON,
a.k.a. June Boy,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Alabama
_________________________
(April 16, 2014)
Before HULL, MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM:
Thomas Goggans, appointed counsel for Anthony Lamar Winston 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.
Case: 12-14765 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 Page: 2 of 2
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 Winston=s convictions and
sentences are AFFIRMED. Winston’s motion for appointment of new counsel is
DENIED as moot.
2