Filed: Sep. 16, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 15-10143 Date Filed: 09/16/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 15-10143 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 5:14-cr-00015-RS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RICHARD HENRI VISSERS, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (September 16, 2015) Before MARCUS, MARTIN and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 15-10143 Date F
Summary: Case: 15-10143 Date Filed: 09/16/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 15-10143 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 5:14-cr-00015-RS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RICHARD HENRI VISSERS, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (September 16, 2015) Before MARCUS, MARTIN and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 15-10143 Date Fi..
More
Case: 15-10143 Date Filed: 09/16/2015 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 15-10143
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:14-cr-00015-RS-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RICHARD HENRI VISSERS,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(September 16, 2015)
Before MARCUS, MARTIN and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 15-10143 Date Filed: 09/16/2015 Page: 2 of 2
Walter B. Smith, appointed counsel for Richard Henri Vissers in this
criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the
appellant and has 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 Vissers’s
conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
2