Filed: Oct. 30, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-40077 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ERNESTO GONZALEZ-ALEJO, also known as Javier Garcia-Leal, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CR-353-1 - October 29, 2001 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ernesto Gonzalez-Alejo has filed
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-40077 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ERNESTO GONZALEZ-ALEJO, also known as Javier Garcia-Leal, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CR-353-1 - October 29, 2001 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ernesto Gonzalez-Alejo has filed a..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-40077
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ERNESTO GONZALEZ-ALEJO, also known as Javier Garcia-Leal,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-00-CR-353-1
--------------------
October 29, 2001
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ernesto
Gonzalez-Alejo has filed a motion for leave to withdraw as
counsel and a brief in support in accordance with Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Gonzalez-Alejo has
received a copy of counsel’s motion and brief but has not filed a
response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s
brief reveals no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly,
counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED; counsel is
excused from further responsibilities in this case, and the
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 99-40485
-2-
APPEAL IS DISMISSED.