Filed: Jun. 24, 2004
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 23, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-41147 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RAUL LUCIO-FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-00-CR-112-1 - Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to rep
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 23, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-41147 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RAUL LUCIO-FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-00-CR-112-1 - Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to repr..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 23, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-41147
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAUL LUCIO-FLORES,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-00-CR-112-1
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Raul
Lucio-Flores (Lucio) has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief
in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Lucio was notified but filed no response. Our independent review
of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for
appeal. 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.