United States v. Gore , 199 F. App'x 687 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                                                        F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES CO URT O F APPEALS
    September 25, 2006
    TENTH CIRCUIT                      Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court
    U N ITED STA TES O F A M ER ICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                       No. 06-3077
    v.                                          District of Kansas
    GEO RG E CURTIS GORE,                          (D.C. No. 01-CR-10020-W EB)
    Defendant-Appellant.
    OR D ER AND JUDGM ENT *
    Before M U RPH Y, SE YM OU R, and M cCO NNELL, Circuit Judges.
    George Curtis Gore appeals from the district court’s order revoking his
    supervised release and imposing a 10-month term of imprisonment. At the
    district court hearing, M r. Gore admitted to violating the terms of his supervised
    release by failing on several occasions to participate in a drug treatment program
    *
    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination
    of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is
    therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not
    binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and
    collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and
    judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and
    conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
    and by failing to abstain from alcohol on one occasion. He has not retracted that
    admission or introduced any new evidence.
    In accordance with Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), M r. Gore’s
    counsel has filed a M otion to W ithdraw as Counsel and a brief stating that there
    are no grounds for appeal. In counsel’s brief, he states that M r. Gore does not
    meet any of the criteria for review under 
    18 U.S.C. § 3742
    . M r. Gore has not
    filed a brief indicating disagreement with his counsel’s position. Our independent
    review of the record reveals no grounds for relief under § 3742. Therefore,
    attorney Jon S. W omack’s motion to withdraw as counsel for Appellant is
    GR ANTED, and the judgment of the United States District Court for the District
    of K ansas is AFFIRM ED.
    Entered for the Court,
    M ichael W . M cConnell
    Circuit Judge
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-3077

Citation Numbers: 199 F. App'x 687

Judges: McCONNELL, Murphy, Seymour

Filed Date: 9/25/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023