Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Booker, 02-40525 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 02-40525 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jun. 04, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 02-40525 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DONNIE DARRELL BOOKER; PABLO RUIZ; CEDRIC CATLIN, Defendants-Appellants. - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:01-CR-32-7 - December 16, 2002 Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Robert E. Richardson, Jr., court-appointed appellate counsel for defendant Cedric Catlin
More
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                            No. 02-40525
                          Summary Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                          Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DONNIE DARRELL BOOKER; PABLO RUIZ;
CEDRIC CATLIN,

                                          Defendants-Appellants.

                       --------------------
          Appeals from the United States District Court
                for the Eastern District of Texas
                      USDC No. 4:01-CR-32-7
                       --------------------
                         December 16, 2002

Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Robert E. Richardson, Jr., court-appointed appellate counsel

for defendant Cedric Catlin, has moved for leave to withdraw and

has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967).    Catlin has filed a response to counsel’s motion.

Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no

nonfrivolous issues for appeal.    Counsel’s motion for leave to



     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-40525
                                -2-

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED.   See 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2.   Catlin’s motion for leave to file a pro se appellate

brief is DENIED.   See United States v. Wagner, 
158 F.3d 901
, 902-

03 (5th Cir. 1998).

      ANDERS MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION FOR

PERMISSION TO PROCEED PRO SE DENIED.

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