United States v. Homero Vega-Cazares

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: May 13, 2019
• Docket: 18-50638
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 18-50637 Document: 00514953577 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2019

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 18-50637 May 13, 2019 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Consolidated with 18-50638

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HOMERO JOSHUA VEGA-CAZARES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:14-CR-1110-1 USDC No. 3:17-CR-1490-1

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Homero Vega- Cazares 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). Vega-Cazares has not filed a response. We have

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 18-50637 Document: 00514953577 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2019

No. 18-50637 c/w No. 18-50638

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. The Anders brief pretermits discussion of Vega-Cazares’s guilty plea and revocation of supervised release pursuant to United States v. Garcia, 483 F.3d 289, 291 (5th Cir. 2007), on the ground that Vega-Cazares indicated in writing that he wished to appeal only his sentences. A copy of the Garcia waiver is attached to the brief, but the document does not make clear whether Vega-Cazares intended to forgo a challenge only to his guilty plea or to both his guilty plea and the decision to revoke his supervised release. Nevertheless, the record includes the transcripts we needed to review the record independently, and our review has not uncovered any nonfrivolous basis for challenging the revocation. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Thus, we concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeals present 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 APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.