Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Garcia-Galvan, 99-40609 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 99-40609 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 12, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-40609 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MARIO GARCIA-GALVAN, also known as Arturo Arquello-Garcia, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-98-CR-647-1 - - - - - - - - - - April 12, 2000 Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent M
More
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                            No. 99-40609
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                         Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARIO GARCIA-GALVAN, also known as
Arturo Arquello-Garcia,

                                         Defendant-Appellant.

                        - - - - - - - - - -
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                      USDC No. B-98-CR-647-1
                        - - - - - - - - - -
                           April 12, 2000

Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario

Garcia-Galvan has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a

brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967).   Garcia has not filed a response.    Our independent review

of the brief and record discloses no nonfrivolous issue.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities in this case, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED.   See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.



     *
        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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer