Court Opinion

ID: 66243
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-26 06:08:07+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:07:13.826563
License: Public Domain

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

             IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                           FILED
                    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                      ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                                                        OCT 22, 2008
                            No. 07-14426              THOMAS K. KAHN
                        Non-Argument Calendar             CLERK
                      ________________________

              D. C. Docket No. 07-00054-CR-ORL-28-UAM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                       Plaintiff-Appellee,

                               versus

RICKY DOUGLAS HAYNES, JR.,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________________________________________________

                               6:07-CR-00073-JA-KRS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                       Plaintiff-Appellee,

                               versus

RICKY DOUGLAS HAYNES, JR.,
a.k.a. Ricky D. Haynes,
a.k.a. Lil Rick,
a.k.a. Ricky Douglas Haynes,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant.
                            ________________________

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Middle District of Florida
                         _________________________

                                 (October 22, 2008)

Before ANDERSON, BARKETT and HULL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

      Randee J. Golder, appointed counsel for Ricky Douglas Haynes, Jr., in this

direct criminal appeal, has renewed her motion to withdraw from further

representation of the appellant, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738,

87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Haynes has filed a motion to discharge

counsel and to appoint new 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, Haynes’s conviction and

sentence are AFFIRMED, and Haynes’s motion is DENIED as moot.

                                           2