Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Scott, 08-10075 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 08-10075 Visitors: 32
Filed: Jun. 16, 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 June 16, 2009 No. 08-10075 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. CEDRIC SCOTT Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:07-CR-106-ALL Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Cedric Sco
More
           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                    Fifth Circuit

                                                 FILED
                                                                            June 16, 2009
                                     No. 08-10075
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CEDRIC SCOTT

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:07-CR-106-ALL


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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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