Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Hines, 03-10014 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 03-10014 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 24, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 25, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-10014 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOHN JAMES HINES, also known as Carl Anthony Jourdain, also known as Gregory Andrew Patton, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:02-CR-25-1-C - Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO,
More
                                                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                 Fifth Circuit
                                                               F I L E D
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                   June 25, 2003

                                                            Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                    Clerk
                             No. 03-10014
                         Conference Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus

JOHN JAMES HINES, also known as
Carl Anthony Jourdain, also known
as Gregory Andrew Patton,

                                     Defendant-Appellant.

                        --------------------
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Northern District of Texas
                      USDC No. 1:02-CR-25-1-C
                        --------------------

Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Counsel for John James Hines, the Federal Public Defender,

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required

by Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738
(1967).    Hines has filed

a response.    Our independent review of the brief, the 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 Hines’s 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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