Filed: Sep. 21, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-1773 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Shirley Ann Williams, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: September 6, 2001 Filed: September 21, 2001 _ Before LOKEN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Shirley Williams pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. The
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-1773 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Shirley Ann Williams, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: September 6, 2001 Filed: September 21, 2001 _ Before LOKEN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Shirley Williams pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. The d..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 01-1773
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Minnesota.
Shirley Ann Williams, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: September 6, 2001
Filed: September 21, 2001
___________
Before LOKEN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Shirley Williams pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. The district court1 sentenced Williams to 5 months
imprisonment, followed by 5 months home detention as a condition of the 2-year
supervised release term. On appeal, Williams’s attorney has filed a brief and moved
to withdraw under Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
1
The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of
Minnesota.
Having found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal upon our independent review
pursuant to Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75 (1988), we affirm the judgment of the district
court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-