USA v. Jheison Campino-Palacios, No. 06-12081 (11th Cir. 2007)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 06-12081 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT March 20, 2007 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D. C. Docket No. 05-00411-CR-T-27-TGW UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JHEISON CAMPINO-PALACIOS, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _________________________ (March 20, 2007) Before WILSON, PRYOR and HILL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Alec Fitzgerald Hall, appointed counsel for Jheison Campino-Palacios 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). 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 CampinoPalacios s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. Campino-Palacios s Motion to Continue and Preserve His Rights to Appeal and to Request the Court to Appoint a New Attorney to Continue his Appeal Process is DENIED AS MOOT. Although we affirm Campino-Palacios s sentence, we note that his judgment contains a clerical error. The district court s written judgment, while correctly indicating that Campino-Palacios pled guilty to count two of the indictment, nevertheless described the offense of conviction as the possession with intent to distribute count, which was actually count one of the indictment. Therefore, although we affirm Campino-Palacios s sentence, we VACATE and REMAND for the limited purpose of correcting the clerical error in his judgment. 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.