Filed: Apr. 13, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-1375 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of North Dakota. Crystal Lee Fredericks, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: December 13, 2004 Filed: April 13, 2005 _ Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, BEAM, and RILEY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. On November 18, 2003, a jury found Crystal Lee Fredericks guilty of possession with intent to distribute a contr
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-1375 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of North Dakota. Crystal Lee Fredericks, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: December 13, 2004 Filed: April 13, 2005 _ Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, BEAM, and RILEY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. On November 18, 2003, a jury found Crystal Lee Fredericks guilty of possession with intent to distribute a contro..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 04-1375
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the District
* of North Dakota.
Crystal Lee Fredericks, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: December 13, 2004
Filed: April 13, 2005
___________
Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, BEAM, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
On November 18, 2003, a jury found Crystal Lee Fredericks guilty of
possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance–five grams or more of
methamphetamine. The district court1 sentenced Fredericks to sixty-three months'
imprisonment, with a four-year term of supervised release. This appeal followed.
This case was submitted to the court pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S.
738 (1967). Fredericks' counsel moves to withdraw, arguing that there exists no
1
The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the District of North Dakota.
appealable issues in this case and that Fredericks no longer wishes to pursue her
appeal.
Having carefully reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Further, we find no dispute with the
assertions of Fredericks' counsel concerning Fredericks' own wishes. Accordingly,
we affirm and grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-