Filed: Jun. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 12-15272 Date Filed: 06/27/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-15272 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-00041-SPM-GRJ-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ERIC PAUL SANDBERG, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (June 27, 2013) Before MARCUS, JORDAN and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM: Chet Kaufman, appointed counsel
Summary: Case: 12-15272 Date Filed: 06/27/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-15272 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-00041-SPM-GRJ-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ERIC PAUL SANDBERG, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (June 27, 2013) Before MARCUS, JORDAN and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM: Chet Kaufman, appointed counsel ..
More
Case: 12-15272 Date Filed: 06/27/2013 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-15272
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-00041-SPM-GRJ-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ERIC PAUL SANDBERG,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
_________________________
(June 27, 2013)
Before MARCUS, JORDAN and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM:
Chet Kaufman, appointed counsel for Eric Paul Sandberg 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
Case: 12-15272 Date Filed: 06/27/2013 Page: 2 of 2
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 Sandberg=s conviction and
sentence are AFFIRMED.
2