Filed: Feb. 14, 2007
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 February 14, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 05-50381 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GUSTAVO AVILES, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:02-CR-752-3 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Gusta
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 14, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 05-50381 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GUSTAVO AVILES, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:02-CR-752-3 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Gustav..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 14, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 05-50381 Clerk
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GUSTAVO AVILES,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 2:02-CR-752-3
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Gustavo Aviles has
requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Aviles has not filed
a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s
brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.