Filed: Mar. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 14-12252 Date Filed: 03/20/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-12252 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-00039-WS-B-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LEE ANTHONY GUIDRY, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama _ (March 20, 2015) Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Robert Ratliff, appointe
Summary: Case: 14-12252 Date Filed: 03/20/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-12252 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-00039-WS-B-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LEE ANTHONY GUIDRY, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama _ (March 20, 2015) Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Robert Ratliff, appointed..
More
Case: 14-12252 Date Filed: 03/20/2015 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-12252
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-00039-WS-B-4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LEE ANTHONY GUIDRY,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Alabama
________________________
(March 20, 2015)
Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Ratliff, appointed counsel for Lee Anthony Guidry in this direct
criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Guidry and
Case: 14-12252 Date Filed: 03/20/2015 Page: 2 of 2
filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738,
87 S. Ct. 1396 (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 Guidry’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
2