Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Perales, 02-50150 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 02-50150 Visitors: 61
Filed: Aug. 23, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 02-50150 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE IGNACIO PERALES, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-01-CR-117-1 - August 21, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* John M. Hurley, counsel appointed to represent Jose Ignacio Perales, has filed a motion for leave to withdraw and has fi
More
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                              No. 02-50150
                          Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                           Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE IGNACIO PERALES,

                                           Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                      USDC No. W-01-CR-117-1
                       --------------------
                          August 21, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     John M. Hurley, counsel appointed to represent Jose Ignacio

Perales, has filed a motion for leave to withdraw and has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967).

Perales has not filed a response.     Our independent review of the

brief 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.



     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer