Filed: May 24, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-50872 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PEDRO AGUIRRE-JOYA, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-97-CR-1019-ALL-H - - - - - - - - - - May 20, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The court-appointed attorney for Pedro Aguirre-Joya (“Aguirre”) has filed a motion to
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-50872 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PEDRO AGUIRRE-JOYA, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-97-CR-1019-ALL-H - - - - - - - - - - May 20, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The court-appointed attorney for Pedro Aguirre-Joya (“Aguirre”) has filed a motion to w..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-50872
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PEDRO AGUIRRE-JOYA,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP-97-CR-1019-ALL-H
- - - - - - - - - -
May 20, 1999
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The court-appointed attorney for Pedro Aguirre-Joya
(“Aguirre”) has filed a motion to withdraw from representation of
Aguirre and a brief as required by Anders v. California,
386 U.S.
738 (1967). Aguirre has filed no response to his attorney’s
motion and brief. Our independent review of the brief and the
record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, Aguirre’s
court-appointed attorney’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED; the
attorney is excused from further responsibilities herein and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.