Filed: Dec. 16, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-20203 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JAIRO ALVAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CR-210-2 - December 16, 1999 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Jairo Alvarez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-20203 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JAIRO ALVAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CR-210-2 - December 16, 1999 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Jairo Alvarez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20203
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAIRO ALVAREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CR-210-2
--------------------
December 16, 1999
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Counsel appointed to represent Jairo Alvarez has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Alvarez has filed a response
requesting to proceed pro se. Our independent review of the
brief, the record, and Alvarez’ response discloses no
nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the
motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 99-20203
-2-
Alvarez’ motion to proceed pro se is DENIED. See United States
v. Wagner,
158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).