Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Amaya-Arce, 08-40346 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 08-40346 Visitors: 11
Filed: Feb. 18, 2009
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 18, 2009 No. 08-40346 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. GABRIEL AMAYA-ARCE, also known as Esquivel Bocanegra Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:07-CR-1143-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Pub
More
          IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                   FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                   Fifth Circuit

                                                FILED
                                                                February 18, 2009
                                No. 08-40346
                             Conference Calendar            Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                    Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                           Plaintiff-Appellee
v.

GABRIEL AMAYA-ARCE, also known as Esquivel Bocanegra

                                           Defendant-Appellant


                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                          USDC No. 7:07-CR-1143-1


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
      The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Gabriel Amaya-Arce
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders
v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967).    Amaya-Arce has not responded.         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 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2.


      *
      Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. 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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer