Filed: Aug. 21, 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 August 21, 2007 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 07-10260 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. NATHANIEL JEREMY SALAZAR Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:06-CR-27-8 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Nathan
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 21, 2007 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 07-10260 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. NATHANIEL JEREMY SALAZAR Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:06-CR-27-8 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Nathani..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
August 21, 2007
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 07-10260
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
NATHANIEL JEREMY SALAZAR
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:06-CR-27-8
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Nathaniel Jeremy Salazar has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Salazar has filed a response. Our independent
review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Salazar’s response 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not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth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.