Filed: Aug. 23, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-40007 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DEVIN YOUNG, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:00-CR-30-ALL - August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Assistant Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Devin Young has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-40007 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DEVIN YOUNG, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:00-CR-30-ALL - August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Assistant Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Devin Young has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-40007
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DEVIN YOUNG,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:00-CR-30-ALL
--------------------
August 23, 2001
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Assistant Federal Public Defender appointed to represent
Devin Young has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief
as required by Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Young
has received copies of counsel’s motion and brief but did not
file a response. Our independent review of counsel’s brief and
the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly,
counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is
excused from further responsibilities herein, 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.