United States v. Purdue

325 F. App'x 813
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided April 29, 2009·No. No. 08-16006·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Randolph Murrell, appointed counsel for Shelton Purdue, 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 record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.

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

United States v. Purdue, 325 F. App'x 813 (11th Cir. 2009).

325 F. App'x 813 (United States v. Purdue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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