Filed: May 20, 2010
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Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT MAY 20, 2010 No. 09-14827 JOHN LEY Non-Argument Calendar CLERK _ D. C. Docket No. 08-00457-CR-1-CAP UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ENEYDA ROMERO MOLINA, a.k.a. Martha Salgado-Vega, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _ (May 20, 1020) Before MARCUS, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judg
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT MAY 20, 2010 No. 09-14827 JOHN LEY Non-Argument Calendar CLERK _ D. C. Docket No. 08-00457-CR-1-CAP UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ENEYDA ROMERO MOLINA, a.k.a. Martha Salgado-Vega, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _ (May 20, 1020) Before MARCUS, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judge..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
MAY 20, 2010
No. 09-14827 JOHN LEY
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 08-00457-CR-1-CAP
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ENEYDA ROMERO MOLINA,
a.k.a. Martha Salgado-Vega,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________
(May 20, 1020)
Before MARCUS, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
David Marshall, appointed counsel for Eneyda Romero Molina 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 Molina’s convictions and
sentences are AFFIRMED.
2