Filed: Dec. 19, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: Case: 11-40379 Document: 00511699122 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/19/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 19, 2011 No. 11-40379 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE LUIS RODRIGUEZ-CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:10-CR-1800-1 Before KING, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PE
Summary: Case: 11-40379 Document: 00511699122 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/19/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 19, 2011 No. 11-40379 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE LUIS RODRIGUEZ-CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:10-CR-1800-1 Before KING, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER..
More
Case: 11-40379 Document: 00511699122 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/19/2011
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
December 19, 2011
No. 11-40379
Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JORGE LUIS RODRIGUEZ-CRUZ,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:10-CR-1800-1
Before KING, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Luis Rodriguez-
Cruz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores,
632 F.3d
229 (5th Cir. 2011). Rodriguez-Cruz has not filed a response. We have reviewed
counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We
concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue
for appellate review. 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.
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.