United States v. Evans

309 F. App'x 460
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided February 11, 2009·No. Nos. 05-5753-cr(L), 05-5829-cr(Con)·Published

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Susan M. Damplo, attorney for defendant-appellant Craig Moye, filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), on the ground that there were no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal. The government filed a cross-motion for summary affirmance on the same ground. Following oral argument, we issued a Summary Order dated September 18, 2008, remanding the case with respect to Moye and requesting clarification as to whether Moye was sentenced pursuant to Guidelines § 4B1.1 or § 2D1.1. See United States v. Evans, 293 Fed.Appx. 63 (2d Cir.2008). The district court has clarified that it relied on Guidelines § 4B1.1 when it sentenced Moye. See Response to Remand, Jan. 13, 2009.

We have reviewed Moye’s attorney’s Anders motion, her brief in support of it, and the government’s cross-motion for summary affirmance. In light of the district court’s clarification of the record, we agree with Moye’s counsel and the government that there are no non-frivolous issues that could be raised on appeal.

Accordingly, the motion of Susan M. Damplo to withdraw as counsel is GRANTED. The government’s cross-motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. Consequently, the judgment of conviction of Craig Moye is hereby AFFIRMED.

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

United States v. Evans, 309 F. App'x 460 (2d Cir. 2009).

309 F. App'x 460 (United States v. Evans) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Evans
293 F. App'x 63 (Second Circuit, 2008)