Case ID: f-appx_414/html/0247-01.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. Phillip SMITH, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-13368
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Feb. 11, 2011.
    Tracia M. King, Matthew Turner Jackson, Lawrence R. Sommerfeld, Sally Yates, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michael J. Trost, Attorney at Law, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before BLACK, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Michael Trost, appointed counsel for Phillip Smith, in this direct criminal appeal, has filed a motion to withdraw from further representation of the appellant, because counsel believes that the appeal is without merit. Counsel 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 record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguably meritorious issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Smith’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.