Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Plamen Atanosov, 14-12077 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Number: 14-12077 Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 14-12077 Date Filed: 01/21/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-12077 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-00026-ODE-AJB-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PLAMEN ATANASOV, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _ (January 21, 2015) Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Mary Erickson, appointed coun
More
              Case: 14-12077    Date Filed: 01/21/2015   Page: 1 of 2


                                                             [DO NOT PUBLISH]

               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                        FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                          ________________________

                                No. 14-12077
                            Non-Argument Calendar
                          ________________________

                   D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-00026-ODE-AJB-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                          versus

PLAMEN ATANASOV,
                                                              Defendant-Appellant.

                         __________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Georgia
                        _________________________

                                (January 21, 2015)

Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

      Mary Erickson, appointed counsel for Plamen Atanasov 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
              Case: 14-12077    Date Filed: 01/21/2015   Page: 2 of 2


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 Atanasov’s conviction and sentence are

AFFIRMED.




                                         2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer