United States v. Clemons

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Clemons

677 F. App'x 638

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 2017

DocketNo. 16-13367 Non-Argument Calendar

StatusPublished

This text of 677 F. App'x 638 (United States v. Clemons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Clemons, 677 F. App'x 638 (11th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

John Philip Fox, appointed counsel for Eddie Clemons, 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 [639]*639the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Clemons’s revocation and sentence are AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

John Philip Fox, appointed counsel for Eddie Clemons, 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 [639]*639the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Clemons’s revocation and sentence are AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

677 F. App'x 638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-clemons-ca11-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack