Filed: Aug. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 13-11371 Document: 00512752076 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-11371 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 29, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff-Appellee v. RUBEN REQUENA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:09-CR-52-1 Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The
Summary: Case: 13-11371 Document: 00512752076 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-11371 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 29, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff-Appellee v. RUBEN REQUENA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:09-CR-52-1 Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The ..
More
Case: 13-11371 Document: 00512752076 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-11371
Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
August 29, 2014
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
RUBEN REQUENA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:09-CR-52-1
Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ruben Requena 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). Requena 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.