Filed: Feb. 27, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-20422 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PECO PERICO MALLARD, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CR-605-2 - February 26, 2002 Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Peco Perico Mallard on direct appeal has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-20422 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PECO PERICO MALLARD, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CR-605-2 - February 26, 2002 Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Counsel appointed to represent Peco Perico Mallard on direct appeal has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-20422
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PECO PERICO MALLARD,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-00-CR-605-2
--------------------
February 26, 2002
Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Counsel appointed to represent Peco Perico Mallard on
direct appeal has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Mallard has
filed a response in which he lists the following potential issues
for appeal: the evidence was not sufficient to connect him to a
drug conspiracy; his plea was involuntary; he should have been
allowed to plead to a lesser charge; the evidence does not support
the drug quantity that was used to determine his sentence; 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 01-20422
-2-
district court erred in attributing as relevant conduct the drug
quantity that was used to determine his sentence.
Our independent review of the brief, Mallard’s response,
and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this direct
appeal. Accordingly, the 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.