Filed: Jun. 20, 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 June 20, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 06-41268 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus OSCAR ADAHIR ROSAS-PULIDO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:06-CR-585-1 - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Def
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 20, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 06-41268 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus OSCAR ADAHIR ROSAS-PULIDO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:06-CR-585-1 - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defe..
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 20, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 06-41268 Clerk
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
OSCAR ADAHIR ROSAS-PULIDO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:06-CR-585-1
--------------------
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Oscar
Adahir Rosas-Pulido (Rosas) has moved for leave to withdraw
and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Rosas has not filed a response. Our
independent review of the brief and the record discloses no
nonfrivolous issue for 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.