United States v. Knowles

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Knowles

359 F. App'x 956

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedJanuary 7, 2010

DocketNo. 09-12890

StatusPublished

This text of 359 F. App'x 956 (United States v. Knowles) 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. Knowles, 359 F. App'x 956 (11th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Pinoli, appointed counsel for Oscar Lynden Knowles, has filed a motion to withdraw from further representation, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s denial of Knowles’s motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Pinoli, appointed counsel for Oscar Lynden Knowles, has filed a motion to withdraw from further representation, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s denial of Knowles’s motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 F. App'x 956, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-knowles-ca11-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack