Filed: Jun. 20, 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 June 20, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-50318 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTURO ACEVEDO-QUINTERO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:05-CR-635-6 - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 20, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-50318 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTURO ACEVEDO-QUINTERO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:05-CR-635-6 - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 20, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-50318
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ARTURO ACEVEDO-QUINTERO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 2:05-CR-635-6
--------------------
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Arturo Acevedo-Quintero
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in
accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Acevedo-Quintero has filed a response. Our independent review
of the record, counsel’s brief, and Acevedo-Quintero’s response
demonstrates that there is no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.
The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at
this time of Acevedo-Quintero’s claims of ineffective assistance
of counsel. See United States v. Cantwell,
470 F.3d 1087, 1091
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 06-50318
-2-
(5th Cir. 2006). 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.