Filed: Feb. 16, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-21046 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOAQUIN AGUILA-ECHENIQUE, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-99-CR-210-ALL - February 15, 2001 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Joaquin Aguila-Echenique on appeal has moved to withdraw and has filed a b
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-21046 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOAQUIN AGUILA-ECHENIQUE, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-99-CR-210-ALL - February 15, 2001 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Joaquin Aguila-Echenique on appeal has moved to withdraw and has filed a br..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-21046
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOAQUIN AGUILA-ECHENIQUE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-99-CR-210-ALL
--------------------
February 15, 2001
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Counsel appointed to represent Joaquin Aguila-Echenique on
appeal has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Aguila-Echenique has
not filed a response.
Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses
no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion
for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further
responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.