Filed: Mar. 01, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-10354 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DAVID W. ELSER, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-240-1-E - February 28, 2002 Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent David W. Elser has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as requir
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-10354 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DAVID W. ELSER, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-240-1-E - February 28, 2002 Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent David W. Elser has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as require..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-10354
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DAVID W. ELSER,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CR-240-1-E
--------------------
February 28, 2002
Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent David W.
Elser has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as
required by Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Elser has
filed a response. Our independent review of the brief, Elser's
response, 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. Elser's motion for
appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.