United States v. Hammock

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Hammock

332 F. App'x 606

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedSeptember 9, 2009

DocketNo. 09-11672

StatusPublished

This text of 332 F. App'x 606 (United States v. Hammock) 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. Hammock, 332 F. App'x 606 (11th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

D. Nicole Williams, appointed counsel for Kenny Hammock in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation 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 confirms that there are no issues of arguable merit on appeal. Therefore, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the denial of Hammock’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion is AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

D. Nicole Williams, appointed counsel for Kenny Hammock in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation 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 confirms that there are no issues of arguable merit on appeal. Therefore, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the denial of Hammock’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

332 F. App'x 606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hammock-ca11-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack