Filed: Apr. 18, 2007
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 April 18, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-20839 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus WILLIAM MAURICE HOOPER, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-540 - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to repres
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 18, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-20839 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus WILLIAM MAURICE HOOPER, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-540 - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represe..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 18, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-20839
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM MAURICE HOOPER,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CR-540
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent William Maurice Hooper
has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required
by Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Hooper has not
filed a response. Our independent review of the record and
counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.
Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is
excused from further responsibilities, 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.