United States v. Hicks

278 F. App'x 976
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided May 27, 2008·No. No. 07-10896·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Richard A. Grossman, appointed counsel for William Hicks, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal supported by a brief prepared 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 the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no issues of arguable merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and Hicks’s convictions and aggregate sentence are AFFIRMED.

Also, while counsel’s motion to withdraw was pending, Hicks filed three motions to compel production of transcripts and other documents. As neither the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures nor the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure authorize discovery on appeal, Hicks’s motions are DENIED.

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

United States v. Hicks, 278 F. App'x 976 (11th Cir. 2008).

278 F. App'x 976 (United States v. Hicks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mitchell v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2025
Williams v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2024
Schneider v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2022
Odoni v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2020
Simmons v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2020
Pacious v. National Aeronautics & Space Administration
469 F. App'x 874 (Federal Circuit, 2012)