Filed: Apr. 16, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 16, 2008 No. 07-40255 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. MARCUS RAY BOYKIN Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:05-CR-148-1 Before PRADO, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Marcus Ray Boykin has mo
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 16, 2008 No. 07-40255 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. MARCUS RAY BOYKIN Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:05-CR-148-1 Before PRADO, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Marcus Ray Boykin has mov..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
April 16, 2008
No. 07-40255
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
MARCUS RAY BOYKIN
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:05-CR-148-1
Before PRADO, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Marcus Ray Boykin has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Boykin has filed a response. Our independent review of the
record, counsel’s brief, and Boykin’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for
appeal. Accordingly, 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. The Government’s motion to dismiss is
DENIED.
*
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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.