Filed: Feb. 13, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-30485 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GERALD SMITH, Defendant- Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CR-30015-3 - February 9, 2001 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* Court-appointed counsel for Gerald Smith has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. Cali
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-30485 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GERALD SMITH, Defendant- Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CR-30015-3 - February 9, 2001 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* Court-appointed counsel for Gerald Smith has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. Calif..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-30485
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GERALD SMITH,
Defendant-
Appellant.
-------------------------------------------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 99-CR-30015-3
--------------------------------------------------------
February 9, 2001
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM:*
Court-appointed counsel for Gerald Smith has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a
brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Smith has received a copy of counsel’s
motion and brief, and he has filed a pro se brief of his own. Our review of the briefs filed by counsel
and Smith and of the record discloses no nonfrivolous point for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for
leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the APPEAL
IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.