Whether counsel can withdraw without finding the case to be 'wholly frivolous' as required by Anders v. California

QUESTION PRESENTED © 7 , a IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANDERS V. CALIFORINA, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), CAN COUNSEL SIMPLY WITHDRAW WITHOUT FINDING THE CASE TO BE “WHOLLY FRIVOLOUS” AS REQUIRED BY ANDERS? , Il. DID THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT VIOLATE ANDERS V. CALIFORINA, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) BY NOT FINDING THE ISSUE ~AFTER FULL EXAMINATION ~ OF THE RECORDTO BE "WHOLLY FRIVOLOUS" AS REQUIRED BY ANDERS? III. . : : WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED IN FAILING TO CONDUCT A MEANINGFUL APPELLATE REVIEW BY FAILING TO EXPLAIN ITS REASON ' FOR DENIAL? PARTIES OF THE PROCEEDING __ 7 Petitioner, Hernandez Daniels, was the Defendant in the District Court for the Northen District of Florida, Tallahassee : Division before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The United States of America, was the Plaintiff in the District Court for : the Northern District of Florida, and the Appellee before the : Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. . oo ‘ , i . . iii .. . .