Filed: Oct. 05, 2004
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 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 03-30560 Clerk Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ALBERT BAHAM; JACK WILLIE, Defendants-Appellants. - No. 03-30580 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JACK WILLIE, Defendant-Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USD
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 03-30560 Clerk Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ALBERT BAHAM; JACK WILLIE, Defendants-Appellants. - No. 03-30580 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JACK WILLIE, Defendant-Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 03-30560 Clerk
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALBERT BAHAM; JACK WILLIE,
Defendants-Appellants.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
No. 03-30580
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JACK WILLIE,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 01-CR-236-2
USDC No. 01-CR-292-1-C
Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
Counsel appointed to represent Albert Baham and Jack
Willie in appeal No. 03-30560 have requested leave to withdraw and
have filed a brief as required by Anders v. California,
386 U.S.
738 (1967). Willie’s same court-appointed attorney has also re-
quested leave to withdraw and has filed an Anders brief in appeal
No. 03-30580. We sua sponte consolidate the appeals pursuant to
FED. R. APP. P. 3(b)(2).
In appeal No. 03-30560, Baham and Willie have each filed
separate responses in which they both seek the appointment of
substitute counsel. Baham’s and Willie’s pro se requests are
DENIED.
Our independent review of counsels’ briefs and the
records for both appeals discloses no nonfrivolous issues.
Counsels’ motions for leave to withdraw are GRANTED, counsel are
excused from further responsibilities, and appeal Nos. 03-30560 and
03-30580 are DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
APPEALS CONSOLIDATED; PRO SE REQUESTS FOR SUBSTITUTE
APPELLATE COUNSEL DENIED; APPEALS DISMISSED; MOTIONS TO WITHDRAW
GRANTED.
2