United States v. Laketaya W. Abdullah ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                                           [DO NOT PUBLISH]
    
    
                  IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                                        FILED
                          FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                            ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                                                                 JUNE 11, 2009
                                  No. 08-16180                 THOMAS K. KAHN
                              Non-Argument Calendar                CLERK
                            ________________________
    
                     D. C. Docket No. 97-00046-CR-T-17-TGW
    
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    
    
                                                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    
                                       versus
    
    LAKETAYA W. ABDULLAH,
    a.k.a. Lisa,
    a.k.a. Baby Doll,
    
                                                              Defendant-Appellant.
    
    
                            ________________________
    
                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Middle District of Florida
                          _________________________
    
                                   (June 11, 2009)
    
    Before: BIRCH, HULL and HILL, Circuit Judges.
    
    PER CURIAM:
          Leonard E. Clark, appointed counsel for Laketaya W. Abdullah in this appeal
    
    from the district court’s denial of Abdullah’s motion to reduce her sentence under
    
    18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), 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 the district court’s denial of relief
    
    under § 3582(c)(2) is AFFIRMED.
    
    
    
    
                                              2
    

Document Info

DocketNumber: 08-16180

Filed Date: 6/11/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014