Filed: Feb. 16, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: No. 99-30521 -1- IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-30521 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus OSCAR RAMIREZ-GONZALES, also known as Edwin Perez, also known as Oscar Moreno-Bariento, also known as Oscar De La Cruz, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CR-8-1-A - February 16, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CUR
Summary: No. 99-30521 -1- IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-30521 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus OSCAR RAMIREZ-GONZALES, also known as Edwin Perez, also known as Oscar Moreno-Bariento, also known as Oscar De La Cruz, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CR-8-1-A - February 16, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURI..
More
No. 99-30521
-1-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-30521
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
OSCAR RAMIREZ-GONZALES, also known as Edwin Perez,
also known as Oscar Moreno-Bariento, also known as
Oscar De La Cruz,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 99-CR-8-1-A
--------------------
February 16, 2000
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Assistant Federal Public Defender (AFPD) appointed to
represent Oscar Ramirez-Gonzales has filed a motion to withdraw
from representation of Ramirez and a brief as required by Anders
v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Ramirez has not responded to
counsel’s motion. Our independent review of the brief and the
record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the APPD’s
motion to withdraw is GRANTED; the AFPD is excused from further
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 99-30521
-2-
responsibilities herein and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2.