Hebert v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hebert v. State

937 So. 2d 215, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 14680, 2006 WL 2520686

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hebert v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 962 So. 2d 1068 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 1, 2006·No. No. 3D04-2605·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mark Hebert appeals his convictions and sentences for burglary of an occupied dwelling and third degree grand theft. Appointed counsel has filed a memorandum brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We conclude that the Anders proceeding is appropriate and grant appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw. The defendant has failed to raise any meritorious points in his pro se brief, and accordingly, we affirm his convictions and sentences.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Mark Hebert appeals his convictions and sentences for burglary of an occupied dwelling and third degree grand theft. Appointed counsel has filed a memorandum brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We conclude that the Anders proceeding is appropriate and grant appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw. The defendant has failed to raise any meritorious points in his pro se brief, and accordingly, we affirm his convictions and sentences.

Affirmed.

Hebert v. State, 937 So. 2d 215, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 14680, 2006 WL 2520686 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

937 So. 2d 215 (Hebert v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related