United States v. Williams

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Williams

678 F. App'x 814

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedJanuary 30, 2017

DocketNo. 16-11080 Non-Argument Calendar

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 678 F. App'x 814 (United States v. Williams) 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. Williams, 678 F. App'x 814 (11th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Charles Trúncale, appointed counsel for Michael Leon Williams, 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). 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 Williams’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Charles Trúncale, appointed counsel for Michael Leon Williams, 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). 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 Williams’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

678 F. App'x 814, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-williams-ca11-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack