Filed: Oct. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Case: 19-30180 Document: 00515172259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/24/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 19-30180 FILED October 24, 2019 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ROT VAN NGUYEN, also known as Minh Dung, also known as Minh Dung Duong, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:18-CR-28-1 Befor
Summary: Case: 19-30180 Document: 00515172259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/24/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 19-30180 FILED October 24, 2019 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ROT VAN NGUYEN, also known as Minh Dung, also known as Minh Dung Duong, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:18-CR-28-1 Before..
More
Case: 19-30180 Document: 00515172259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/24/2019
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 19-30180
FILED
October 24, 2019
Conference Calendar
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff−Appellee,
versus
ROT VAN NGUYEN,
also known as Minh Dung, also known as Minh Dung Duong,
Defendant−Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
No. 2:18-CR-28-1
Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rot Van Nguyen has
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in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.
Case: 19-30180 Document: 00515172259 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/24/2019
No. 19-30180
moved to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. Califor-
nia,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores,
632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.
2011). Nguyen has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and
the relevant portions of the record.
We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no non-
frivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is
GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
2