Filed: Jul. 07, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-20573 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ROBERTO CASTELLANOS, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (H:98-CR-340-2) _ July 7, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appointed counsel for Roberto Castellanos has moved for leave to withdraw, including filing a brief as required by Anders v. California, 38
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-20573 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ROBERTO CASTELLANOS, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (H:98-CR-340-2) _ July 7, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appointed counsel for Roberto Castellanos has moved for leave to withdraw, including filing a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 99-20573
Summary Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ROBERTO CASTELLANOS,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H:98-CR-340-2)
_________________________________________________________________
July 7, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appointed counsel for Roberto Castellanos has moved for leave
to withdraw, including filing a brief as required by Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Castellanos has filed a response
to counsel’s motion. Our independent review of the brief,
Castellanos’ response, and the record, discloses no nonfrivolous
issue. 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.