Filed: Dec. 08, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 5, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-30438 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DAVID ANTHONY FUSELIER; BERRY LYNN HARRIS, Defendants-Appellants. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:02-CR-20116-02 - Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:*
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 5, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-30438 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DAVID ANTHONY FUSELIER; BERRY LYNN HARRIS, Defendants-Appellants. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:02-CR-20116-02 - Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* C..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 5, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-30438
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DAVID ANTHONY FUSELIER; BERRY LYNN HARRIS,
Defendants-Appellants.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:02-CR-20116-02
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Counsel appointed to represent Beverly L. Harris on direct
appeal has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Harris 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.