Filed: May 18, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: Case: 10-40766 Document: 00511481825 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 18, 2011 No. 10-40766 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAYMOND FLORES, also known as Raymond James Flores, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-438-1 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMEN
Summary: Case: 10-40766 Document: 00511481825 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 18, 2011 No. 10-40766 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAYMOND FLORES, also known as Raymond James Flores, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-438-1 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT..
More
Case: 10-40766 Document: 00511481825 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2011
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
May 18, 2011
No. 10-40766
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
RAYMOND FLORES, also known as Raymond James Flores,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:10-CR-438-1
Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Raymond Flores has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386
U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores,
632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Flores
has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant
portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment
that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly,
counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from
further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR.
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.