Filed: Aug. 30, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: Case: 12-11912 Date Filed: 08/30/2012 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-11912 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 9:03-cr-80039-DTKH-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RICKY KINWARD MANNING, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (August 30, 2012) Before CARNES, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Robin Cindy Rosen-Evans, appo
Summary: Case: 12-11912 Date Filed: 08/30/2012 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-11912 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 9:03-cr-80039-DTKH-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RICKY KINWARD MANNING, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (August 30, 2012) Before CARNES, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Robin Cindy Rosen-Evans, appoi..
More
Case: 12-11912 Date Filed: 08/30/2012 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-11912
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 9:03-cr-80039-DTKH-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RICKY KINWARD MANNING,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(August 30, 2012)
Before CARNES, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Robin Cindy Rosen-Evans, appointed counsel for Ricky Kinward Manning
Case: 12-11912 Date Filed: 08/30/2012 Page: 2 of 2
in this 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) appeal, has filed a motion to withdraw from further
representation, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California,
386
U.S. 738 (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
§ 3582(c)(2) relief is AFFIRMED.
2