Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0631-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Moses SIMMONS, a.k.a. Fam, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-10262 Non-Argument Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    (September 1, 2017)
    R. Brian Tanner, James D. Durham, E. Gregory Gilluly, Jr., Tania D. Groover, Brian T. Rafferty, Edward J. Tarver, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Savannah, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Moses Simmons, Pro Se
    
      Before HULL, WILSON and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Amy Lee Copeland, appointed counsel for Moses Simmons, 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). 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 Simmons’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. 
      
      . We acknowledge that Simmons expressed dissatisfaction with his prior counsel’s performance leading up to his sentencing and that he might wish to argue that counsel was ineffective in that respect. Such claims, however, generally "are not considered for the first time on direct appeal,” but rather are best reserved for postconviction proceedings. United States v. Tyndale, 209 F.3d 1292, 1294 (11th Cir. 2000); see Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-05, 123 S.Ct. 1690, 155 L.Ed.2d 714 (2003).