United States v. Ronald Geddis

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedFebruary 6, 2025
Docket24-12009
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Ronald Geddis (United States v. Ronald Geddis) 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. Ronald Geddis, (11th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 24-12009 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 02/06/2025 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-12009 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RONALD GEDDIS,

Defendant-Appellant. ____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:19-cr-00056-MSS-AEP-1 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 24-12009 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 02/06/2025 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 24-12009

Before JORDAN, BRANCH, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Maribeth Wetzel, appointed counsel for Ronald Geddis in this appeal from an order granting a motion for return of property, see Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g), has moved to withdraw from further rep- resentation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Although a Rule 41(g) motion filed after the close of criminal proceedings is treated as a civil action in equity and falls under the district court’s equitable jurisdiction, see United States v. Howell, 425 F.3d 971, 974 (11th Cir. 2005), the frame- work established in Anders applies. See Dinkins v. State of Alabama, 526 F.2d 1268, 1269-70 (5th Cir. 1976) (applying Anders to a habeas appeal, which was considered a civil proceeding). 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 the orders of the district court are AFFIRMED.

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

Related

United States v. Granger Howell
425 F.3d 971 (Eleventh Circuit, 2005)
Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Dinkins v. Alabama
526 F.2d 1268 (Fifth Circuit, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Ronald Geddis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ronald-geddis-ca11-2025.