Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Martinez-Rodriguez, 01-50380 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 01-50380 Visitors: 26
Filed: Jun. 21, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-50380 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE BASILIO MARTINEZ-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-00-CR-482-1 - - - - - - - - - - June 18, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Court-appointed counsel for Jose Basilio Martinez-Rodriguez has f
More
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                            No. 01-50380
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                         Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE BASILIO MARTINEZ-RODRIGUEZ,

                                         Defendant-Appellant.

                        - - - - - - - - - -
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Texas
                      USDC No. DR-00-CR-482-1
                        - - - - - - - - - -
                           June 18, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Court-appointed counsel for Jose Basilio Martinez-Rodriguez

has filed a motion for leave to withdraw and a brief in support

of the motion as required by Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967).   Martinez-Rodriguez has not filed a response.

     Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses

no nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal.   Accordingly, the

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from

further responsibilities herein, 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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