USA v. Louis Askew, No. 14-10613 (11th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 14-10613 Date Filed: 01/26/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 14-10613 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:02-cr-20119-FAM-3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LOUIS ASKEW, a.k.a. Dreads, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (January 26, 2015) Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, HULL and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 14-10613 Date Filed: 01/26/2015 Page: 2 of 2 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). 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
