Filed: Jul. 07, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 09-10326 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JULY 7, 2009 Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN _ CLERK D. C. Docket No. 03-00246-CR-J-20-MCR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus TERRANCE SCOTT MILTON, a.k.a. Tee, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (July 7, 2009) Before TJOFLAT, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges. PER CURIA
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 09-10326 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JULY 7, 2009 Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN _ CLERK D. C. Docket No. 03-00246-CR-J-20-MCR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus TERRANCE SCOTT MILTON, a.k.a. Tee, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (July 7, 2009) Before TJOFLAT, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 09-10326 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JULY 7, 2009
Non-Argument Calendar
THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 03-00246-CR-J-20-MCR
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TERRANCE SCOTT MILTON,
a.k.a. Tee,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
_________________________
(July 7, 2009)
Before TJOFLAT, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Lisa Call, appointed counsel for Terrance Scott Milton in this appeal from
the denial of Milton’s motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2), 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,
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 issues of arguable merit,
counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the denial of Milton’s
§ 3582(c)(2) motion is AFFIRMED.
2