Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Soto, 08-40375 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 08-40375 Visitors: 22
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. 08-40375 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. ALFREDO SOTO Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:07-CR-1577-ALL Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Al
More
           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                    Fifth Circuit

                                                 FILED
                                                                          February 18, 2009
                                     No. 08-40375
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALFREDO SOTO

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 5:07-CR-1577-ALL


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alfredo Soto has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967). Soto 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 5 TH C IR. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.

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