Filed: Apr. 12, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-11020 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus EGENESEE EVETTE JOHN, also known as Eginese John, also known as King, also known as Egenise John, also known as Esenesee John, also known as Esenesee King, also known as Egenesee King, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CR-361-ALL-D - April 11, 2002 Before SMITH, DeMOSS,
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-11020 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus EGENESEE EVETTE JOHN, also known as Eginese John, also known as King, also known as Egenise John, also known as Esenesee John, also known as Esenesee King, also known as Egenesee King, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CR-361-ALL-D - April 11, 2002 Before SMITH, DeMOSS, a..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-11020
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EGENESEE EVETTE JOHN, also known as Eginese John, also known as
King, also known as Egenise John, also known as Esenesee John,
also known as Esenesee King, also known as Egenesee King,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:00-CR-361-ALL-D
--------------------
April 11, 2002
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Egenesee
Evette John 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). John 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 APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.