Filed: Mar. 27, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 13-13477 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-13477 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-20484-DMM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FABIAN A. SCOTT, a.k.a. Faybo, a.k.a. Fabo, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (March 27, 2015) Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 13-
Summary: Case: 13-13477 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-13477 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-20484-DMM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FABIAN A. SCOTT, a.k.a. Faybo, a.k.a. Fabo, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (March 27, 2015) Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 13-1..
More
Case: 13-13477 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-13477
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-20484-DMM-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FABIAN A. SCOTT,
a.k.a. Faybo,
a.k.a. Fabo,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(March 27, 2015)
Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 13-13477 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 2 of 2
J. Rafael Rodriguez, appointed counsel for Fabian A. Scott in this direct
criminal appeal, has filed a motion 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 Scott’s
convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
2