Filed: Aug. 31, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Case: 16-10140 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 16-10140 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:02-cr-00043-MP-GRJ-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus THOMAS JEROME LUNDY, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (August 31, 2016) Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 16-10140 Date Filed:
Summary: Case: 16-10140 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 16-10140 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:02-cr-00043-MP-GRJ-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus THOMAS JEROME LUNDY, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (August 31, 2016) Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 16-10140 Date Filed: ..
More
Case: 16-10140 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-10140
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:02-cr-00043-MP-GRJ-4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
THOMAS JEROME LUNDY,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(August 31, 2016)
Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 16-10140 Date Filed: 08/31/2016 Page: 2 of 2
Richard M. Summa, appointed counsel for Thomas Jerome Lundy 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 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 Lundy’s conviction and
sentence is AFFIRMED.
2