United States v. Rogers
This text of 688 F. App'x 821 (United States v. Rogers) 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
W. Thomas Hudson, appointed counsel for Jahques Rogers 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). Rogers filed a response, in which he states that Hudson has provided ineffective assistance of counsel.
Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. We do not consider Rogers’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel because the record is not sufficiently developed for review. See United States v. Puentes-Hurtado, 794 F.3d 1278, 1285 (11th Cir. 2015). He is free to raise these, allegations on collateral review in a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.See id.
Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Rogers’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
688 F. App'x 821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rogers-ca11-2017.