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. 06-20595 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JAIME SOLIS-CAMPOZANO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:06-CR-75 - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appoin
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. 06-20595 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JAIME SOLIS-CAMPOZANO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:06-CR-75 - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appoint..
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. 06-20595
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAIME SOLIS-CAMPOZANO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:06-CR-75
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime
Solis-Campozano has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a
brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738
(1967). Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record
discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly,
counsel’s 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.