Filed: Sep. 21, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-20781 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus REGINALD BERNARD SMITH, also known as Ronald Eric Smith, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CR-4-1 - September 17, 19991 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender, appointed to represent Reginald Bernard Smith, has moved for
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-20781 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus REGINALD BERNARD SMITH, also known as Ronald Eric Smith, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CR-4-1 - September 17, 19991 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender, appointed to represent Reginald Bernard Smith, has moved for ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-20781
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
REGINALD BERNARD SMITH,
also known as Ronald Eric Smith,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CR-4-1
--------------------
September 17, 19991
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender, appointed to represent Reginald
Bernard Smith, has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a
brief as required by Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Smith has filed a response to counsel’s motion to withdraw. Our
independent review of counsel’s brief, Smith’s response, and the
record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion
for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further
responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 CIR.
R. 47.5.4.