Filed: Apr. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 14-13815 Date Filed: 04/07/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-13815 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 8:13-cr-00338-SDM-MAP-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PATRICIA M. SYLING, a.k.a. Patricia Cleary Syling, a.k.a. Patricia Clearysyling, a.k.a. Patricia Cleary-Dunne, a.k.a. Patricia Dunne, a.k.a. Patricia Dunn, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middl
Summary: Case: 14-13815 Date Filed: 04/07/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-13815 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 8:13-cr-00338-SDM-MAP-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PATRICIA M. SYLING, a.k.a. Patricia Cleary Syling, a.k.a. Patricia Clearysyling, a.k.a. Patricia Cleary-Dunne, a.k.a. Patricia Dunne, a.k.a. Patricia Dunn, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle..
More
Case: 14-13815 Date Filed: 04/07/2015 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-13815
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:13-cr-00338-SDM-MAP-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PATRICIA M. SYLING,
a.k.a. Patricia Cleary Syling,
a.k.a. Patricia Clearysyling,
a.k.a. Patricia Cleary-Dunne,
a.k.a. Patricia Dunne,
a.k.a. Patricia Dunn,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(April 7, 2015)
Case: 14-13815 Date Filed: 04/07/2015 Page: 2 of 2
Before HULL, MARTIN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Meghan Ann Collins, appointed counsel for Patricia Syling, has moved to
withdraw from further representation of the appellant and has 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
Syling’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
2