Filed: Jun. 04, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JUNE 4, 2009 No. 08-15403 THOMAS K. KAHN Non-Argument Calendar CLERK _ D. C. Docket No. 97-00483-CR-T-17-EJA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DESBURN PINNOCK, a.k.a. Bull, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (June 4, 2009) Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT and HILL, Circuit Judges.
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JUNE 4, 2009 No. 08-15403 THOMAS K. KAHN Non-Argument Calendar CLERK _ D. C. Docket No. 97-00483-CR-T-17-EJA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DESBURN PINNOCK, a.k.a. Bull, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (June 4, 2009) Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT and HILL, Circuit Judges. ..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JUNE 4, 2009
No. 08-15403 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 97-00483-CR-T-17-EJA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DESBURN PINNOCK,
a.k.a. Bull,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
_________________________
(June 4, 2009)
Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT and HILL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
James Wesley Smith III, appointed counsel for Desburn Pinnock, has filed a
motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by 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 the
district court’s denial of Pinnock’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion is AFFIRMED.
2