USA v. Tony Wynn

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Tony Wynn. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam. Motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Thomas G. Ledford is GRANTED. [7485880-2]. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions.

Download PDF
Case: 15-11055 Date Filed: 11/24/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 15-11055 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-00051-WLS-TQL-6 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY WYNN, Defendant - Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia ________________________ (November 24, 2015) Before MARTIN, JILL PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Thomas Ledford, appointed counsel for Tony Wynn in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Mr. Wynn and Case: 15-11055 Date Filed: 11/24/2015 Page: 2 of 2 prepared a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (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 arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Mr. Wynn’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. 1 1 We acknowledge that Mr. Wynn expressed dissatisfaction with counsel’s performance leading up to his guilty plea and that he might wish to argue that counsel was ineffective in that respect. Such claims, however, generally “are not considered for the first time on direct appeal,” but rather are best reserved for postconviction proceedings. United States v. Tyndale, 209 F.3d 1292, 1294 (11th Cir. 2000); see Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-05 (2003). 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?