United States v. Jones

444 F. App'x 331
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Jones. Read the opinion of the Court — 548 F.3d 1366
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided September 16, 2011·No. 10-15108·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Jan Smith, appointed counsel for Keith Jones, in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and has 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 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 Jones’s revised sentence is affirmed. Nevertheless, we vacate and remand for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to correct a clerical error by docketing Jones’s notice of appeal, which designated both the amended criminal judgment in the present case and the final order in a parallel civil action filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Case No. l:09-cv-20685-PAS), in the aforementioned civil case as well.

AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.

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

United States v. Jones, 444 F. App'x 331 (11th Cir. 2011).

444 F. App'x 331 (United States v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)