Filed: Jun. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 14-13778 Date Filed: 06/02/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-13778 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 9:11-cr-80106-KAM-40 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LAWRENCE SCHECHTMAN, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (June 2, 2015) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 14-13778 Date File
Summary: Case: 14-13778 Date Filed: 06/02/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-13778 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 9:11-cr-80106-KAM-40 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LAWRENCE SCHECHTMAN, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (June 2, 2015) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 14-13778 Date Filed..
More
Case: 14-13778 Date Filed: 06/02/2015 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-13778
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 9:11-cr-80106-KAM-40
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LAWRENCE SCHECHTMAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(June 2, 2015)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 14-13778 Date Filed: 06/02/2015 Page: 2 of 2
Richard L. Rosenbaum, appointed counsel for Lawrence Schechtman 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.
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 Schechtman’s convictions and
sentences are AFFIRMED.
2