United States v. Louis Askew
This text of 591 F. App'x 910 (United States v. Louis Askew) 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.
Opinion
Philip R. Horowitz, appointed counsel for Louis Askew in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). In a pro se response to counsel’s motion to withdraw, Askew requests the appointment of substitute counsel. 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 arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Askew’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED. Askew’s pro se motion for substitute counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Young, 482 F.2d 993, 995 (5th Cir.1973).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
591 F. App'x 910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-louis-askew-ca11-2015.