Case ID: f-appx_591/html/0910-01.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. Louis ASKEW, a.k.a. Dreads, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-10613
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Jan. 26, 2015.
    Kathleen Mary Salyer, Wifredo A. Ferrer, Stephen S. Stallings, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Philip Robert Horowitz, Law Office of Philip R. Horowitz, Esq., Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, HULL and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Philip R. Horowitz, appointed counsel for Louis Askew 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). In a pro se response to counsel’s motion to withdraw, Askew requests the appointment of substitute counsel. 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 Askew’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED. Askew’s pro se motion for substitute counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Young, 482 F.2d 993, 995 (5th Cir.1973).