United States v. Gardner

266 F. App'x 334
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Gardner. Read the opinion of the Court — 248 F. App'x 605
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 20, 2008·No. 06-50946·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Antonio Maurice Gardner has moved for *335 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). Gardner has filed a response. Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Gardner’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Gardner, 266 F. App'x 334 (5th Cir. 2008).

266 F. App'x 334 (United States v. Gardner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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