Legal Opinion

United States v. Roy Williams, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided January 23, 1990No. 89-1773PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

Appointed counsel in this case seeks leave of the court to withdraw from representing defendant-appellant Roy Williams, Jr. because, “after carefully reviewing the record and researching the law,” he determined that the appeal was meritless. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Although notified of his right to respond to the motion pursuant to Circuit Rule 51(a), Williams has failed to respond. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw but not on the basis of his Anders brief, which we find inadequate. Rather, we order counsel to show cause why sanctions…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District 1Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. United States v. Leslie EdwardsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  4. United States v. FlowersCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
  5. United States v. George Bush, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. United States v. Melvin D. Wallace and Arthur M. LevinCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1992
  2. United States v. Roy Williams, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991
  3. United States v. Delacruz-SotoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005
  4. In the Matter Of: David M. BagdadeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
  5. In the Matter of John Millard BECKCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API