United States v. Prim

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Prim

683 F. App'x 745

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided March 23, 2017·No. No. 16-16106 Non-Argument Calendar·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Richard M. Summa, appointed counsel for Keith Terrill Prim in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and fifed 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 [746] arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Prim’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Richard M. Summa, appointed counsel for Keith Terrill Prim in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and fifed 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 [746] arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Prim’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.

United States v. Prim, 683 F. App'x 745 (11th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

683 F. App'x 745 (United States v. Prim) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related