United States v. Daniel Hernandez

539 F. App'x 344
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Daniel Hernandez. Read the opinion of the Court — 470 F. App'x 333
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided August 20, 2013·No. 12-41055·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Daniel Omar Hernandez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Hernandez has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Hernandez’s response. 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

United States v. Daniel Hernandez, 539 F. App'x 344 (5th Cir. 2013).

539 F. App'x 344 (United States v. Daniel Hernandez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Flores
632 F.3d 229 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)