Filed: Feb. 20, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 20, 2008 No. 06-20911 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. DERRICK KEEFEN MEDCALF Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-479 Before KING, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Derrick Keefen Medca
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 20, 2008 No. 06-20911 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. DERRICK KEEFEN MEDCALF Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-479 Before KING, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Derrick Keefen Medcal..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
February 20, 2008
No. 06-20911
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
DERRICK KEEFEN MEDCALF
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CR-479
Before KING, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Derrick Keefen Medcalf has moved
for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Medcalf has not filed a response. Our
independent review of the record and counsel’s brief 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.