Filed: May 30, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Case: 12-15762 Date Filed: 05/30/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-15762 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:96-cr-00025-MP-GRJ-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GEORGE WASHINGTON PARKER, JR., Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (May 30, 2013) Before CARNES, BARKETT and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-15762 Date F
Summary: Case: 12-15762 Date Filed: 05/30/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 12-15762 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:96-cr-00025-MP-GRJ-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GEORGE WASHINGTON PARKER, JR., Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (May 30, 2013) Before CARNES, BARKETT and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-15762 Date Fi..
More
Case: 12-15762 Date Filed: 05/30/2013 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-15762
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:96-cr-00025-MP-GRJ-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GEORGE WASHINGTON PARKER, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(May 30, 2013)
Before CARNES, BARKETT and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-15762 Date Filed: 05/30/2013 Page: 2 of 2
Gwendolyn Spivey, appointed counsel for George Washington Parker, Jr. in
this appeal of the district court’s denial of Parker’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion
for a sentence reduction, 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. Therefore,
counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the denial of Parker’s
§ 3582(c)(2) motion is AFFIRMED.
2