United States v. Clark

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Clark. Read the opinion of the Court — 193 F.3d 845
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided August 15, 2001·No. 00-50974·Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50974 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CODY LEE CLARK,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-00-CR-21-1 -------------------- August 14, 2001

Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Cody Lee Clark has requested

leave to withdraw as counsel and has filed a brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Clark did not file a

response. Our independent review of the brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issue.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the

appeal is DISMISSED.

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Clark, (5th Cir. 2001).

United States v. Clark (United States v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)