Filed: May 30, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-15637 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT Non-Argument Calendar MAY 30, 2012 _ JOHN LEY CLERK D.C. Docket No. 3:06-cr-00011-LC-MD-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL STANTON, a.k.a. Christopher Stanton, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (May 30, 2012) Before WILSON, JORDAN and ANDERSON, Ci
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-15637 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT Non-Argument Calendar MAY 30, 2012 _ JOHN LEY CLERK D.C. Docket No. 3:06-cr-00011-LC-MD-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL STANTON, a.k.a. Christopher Stanton, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (May 30, 2012) Before WILSON, JORDAN and ANDERSON, Cir..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-15637 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Non-Argument Calendar MAY 30, 2012
________________________ JOHN LEY
CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 3:06-cr-00011-LC-MD-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL STANTON,
a.k.a. Christopher Stanton,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(May 30, 2012)
Before WILSON, JORDAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Chet Kaufman, appointed counsel for Christopher Stanton 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 Stanton’s convictions
and sentences are AFFIRMED.
2