Filed: Jun. 01, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-30130 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES of AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SANTIAGO SALINAS, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (96-CR-20021-1) May 28, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Santiago Salinas pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute. He then filed a notice of appeal. Salinas’ co
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-30130 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES of AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SANTIAGO SALINAS, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (96-CR-20021-1) May 28, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Santiago Salinas pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute. He then filed a notice of appeal. Salinas’ cou..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-30130
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES of AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SANTIAGO SALINAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
(96-CR-20021-1)
May 28, 1999
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Santiago Salinas pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess
cocaine with intent to distribute. He then filed a notice of
appeal. Salinas’ court-appointed trial counsel filed a motion for
leave to withdraw on the ground that the appeal was frivolous
because the appellant had entered a voluntary plea of guilty and
the district court’s denial of a downward departure was not
reviewable on appeal. In his brief in support of his motion to
withdraw, counsel demonstrated that he had conscientiously examined
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
the record, and knew of no arguable issues which could be presented
on appeal.
The Court advised the appellant of his right under Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967) to answer counsel's motion by
filing a response setting forth any points he claims are
appealable. The appellant failed to submit any such brief or
reply.
In conformity with the guidelines established by Anders, we
have reviewed the record and are impelled to agree with counsel's
characterization of the appeal as totally frivolous. Accordingly,
we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
DISMISSED.
2