Filed: Sep. 18, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-50472 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RENE GARZA, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-94-CV-8825 - - - - - - - - - - September 3, 1996 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rene Garza (#568511) moves for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP), arguing that the di
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-50472 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RENE GARZA, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-94-CV-8825 - - - - - - - - - - September 3, 1996 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rene Garza (#568511) moves for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP), arguing that the dis..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-50472
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RENE GARZA,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-94-CV-8825
- - - - - - - - - -
September 3, 1996
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rene Garza (#568511) moves for leave to appeal in forma
pauperis (IFP), arguing that the district court improperly denied
his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. Garza has
identified no error in the denial. See United States v. Garza,
SA-994-CV-8825 (W.D. Tex. May 31, 1995). His appeal fails to
present a nonfrivolous issue; the motion for IFP is DENIED.
Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep't,
811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir.
*
Pursuant to Local 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-50472
- 2 -
1986). The appeal is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.