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. 08-40636 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE ORTIZ-ESQUIVEL Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:08-CR-115-1 Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorg
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 16, 2009 No. 08-40636 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE ORTIZ-ESQUIVEL Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:08-CR-115-1 Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 16, 2009
No. 08-40636
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JORGE ORTIZ-ESQUIVEL
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:08-CR-115-1
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Ortiz-Esquivel
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders
v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Ortiz-Esquivel has filed a response. Our
independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Ortiz-Esquivel’s response
discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for
leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
No. 08-40636
herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. Ortiz-Esquivel’s
motion for the appointment of counsel is DENIED.
2