Filed: Feb. 18, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 03-3915 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Eastern District of Arkansas. * Walter Lee Anderson, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * _ Submitted: September 13, 2004 Filed: February 18, 2005 _ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Walter Lee Anderson appeals the revocation of his federal supervised release and subsequent resentencing by the District Co
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 03-3915 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Eastern District of Arkansas. * Walter Lee Anderson, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * _ Submitted: September 13, 2004 Filed: February 18, 2005 _ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Walter Lee Anderson appeals the revocation of his federal supervised release and subsequent resentencing by the District Cou..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 03-3915
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
v. * Eastern District of Arkansas.
*
Walter Lee Anderson, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: September 13, 2004
Filed: February 18, 2005
___________
Before BYE, BOWMAN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Walter Lee Anderson appeals the revocation of his federal supervised release
and subsequent resentencing by the District Court1 after testing positive for cocaine.
Anderson's counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), identifying six issues that "might arguably support"
Anderson's appeal.
Id. at 744.
1
The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, Chief Judge, United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Having conducted an independent review of the record under Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues. We therefore
affirm the judgment of the District Court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-