Filed: Apr. 18, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D April 18, 2007 No. 05-40507 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JESSE VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-492-1 - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Jesse Va
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D April 18, 2007 No. 05-40507 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JESSE VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-492-1 - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Jesse Val..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D
April 18, 2007
No. 05-40507
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JESSE VALDEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:04-CR-492-1
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Counsel appointed to represent Jesse Valdez has filed a
motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Valdez has filed a response. Our
independent review of the brief, Valdez’s response, and the
record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for 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. Valdez’s motion to strike the
Anders brief is DENIED. Valdez’s motion to proceed pro se is
also DENIED. See United States v. Wagner,
158 F.3d 901, 902-03
(5th Cir. 1998).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.