Filed: Jul. 25, 2005
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 July 25, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-30564 c/w No. 04-30566 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JEVON FREDERIC ARMOUR; RASHAD DARNELL SMITH, Defendants-Appellants. - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:04-CR-10001-2 - Before DAVIS, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 25, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-30564 c/w No. 04-30566 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JEVON FREDERIC ARMOUR; RASHAD DARNELL SMITH, Defendants-Appellants. - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:04-CR-10001-2 - Before DAVIS, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:*..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 25, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-30564 c/w
No. 04-30566
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JEVON FREDERIC ARMOUR; RASHAD DARNELL SMITH,
Defendants-Appellants.
--------------------
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 1:04-CR-10001-2
--------------------
Before DAVIS, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Court-appointed counsels for Jevon Frederic Armour and
Rashad Darnell Smith have requested leave to withdraw and have
filed briefs as required by Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738
(1967). Our independent review of counsels’ briefs, Smith’s
responses, and the records discloses no nonfrivolous issue for
appeal. Counsels’ motions for leave to withdraw are GRANTED,
counsels are excused from further responsibilities, 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-30564 c/w Nos. 04-30565 and 04-30566
-2-
appeals of Armour and Smith are DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Smith’s motion to appoint substitute counsel is DENIED.