Filed: Jul. 10, 2020
Latest Update: Jul. 10, 2020
Summary: Case: 19-51159 Document: 00515484218 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/10/2020 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals No. 19-51159 Fifth Circuit FILED Conference Calendar July 10, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHARLES EDWARD JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 6:07-CR-97-1 Before SMITH, STEWART, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CU
Summary: Case: 19-51159 Document: 00515484218 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/10/2020 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals No. 19-51159 Fifth Circuit FILED Conference Calendar July 10, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHARLES EDWARD JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 6:07-CR-97-1 Before SMITH, STEWART, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CUR..
More
Case: 19-51159 Document: 00515484218 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/10/2020
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
No. 19-51159
Fifth Circuit
FILED
Conference Calendar July 10, 2020
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff−Appellee,
versus
CHARLES EDWARD JOHNSON,
Defendant−Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
No. 6:07-CR-97-1
Before SMITH, STEWART, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Charles Johnson
*Pursuant to 5TH CIRCUIT RULE 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth
in 5TH CIRCUIT RULE 47.5.4.
Case: 19-51159 Document: 00515484218 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/10/2020
No. 19-51159
moves to withdraw and has filed a brief per Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738
(1967), and United States v. Flores,
632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Johnson has
responded. We have reviewed counsel’s brief, relevant portions of the record,
and Johnson’s original and supplemental responses.
We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no non-
frivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is
GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Johnson’s motion for appoint-
ment of substitute counsel is DENIED.
2