Filed: Feb. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 17-11227 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 5:13-cr-00013-MW-2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, versus TRACY L. COLLIER, Defendant – Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (February 1, 2018) Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Rachel R. Seaton, appointed counsel for Tracy Collier in this direct cri
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 17-11227 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 5:13-cr-00013-MW-2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, versus TRACY L. COLLIER, Defendant – Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida _ (February 1, 2018) Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Rachel R. Seaton, appointed counsel for Tracy Collier in this direct crim..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 17-11227
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:13-cr-00013-MW-2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
versus
TRACY L. COLLIER,
Defendant – Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(February 1, 2018)
Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Rachel R. Seaton, appointed counsel for Tracy Collier in this direct criminal
appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Collier and has filed
a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738,
87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Our
independent review of the entire record reveals that Seaton’s assessment of the
relative merit of the appeal is correct.1 Because independent examination of the
entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, the motion to withdraw from
further representation is GRANTED and Collier’s total sentence is AFFIRMED.
1
This Court has previously affirmed Collier’s convictions, but we vacated his total
sentence and remanded for resentencing because the District Court failed to make adequate
findings as to (1) whether Collier had reason to know that the conspiracy that formed the basis
for his charges involved over 50 victims, such that a number of victims enhancement was
appropriate, and (2) whether Collier was entitled to a mitigating role reduction. See United
States v. Taylor, 652 F. App’x 902 (11th Cir. 2016), cert. denied sub nom. Collier v. United
States,
137 S. Ct. 1232 (2017).
2