Home/Fifth Circuit/United States v. Joseph Eugene Venable

United States v. Joseph Eugene Venable

474 F.2d 1398, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10640
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 9, 1973
Docket72-3162
StatusPublished

This text of 474 F.2d 1398 (United States v. Joseph Eugene Venable) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Joseph Eugene Venable, 474 F.2d 1398, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10640 (5th Cir. 1973).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The defendant, Joseph E. Venable, appeals from his conviction for interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle and for selling a stolen motor vehicle in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2312, 2313, and 2.

The appellant’s trial counsel, having concluded that there is no meritorious basis for the appeal, has moved to withdraw as counsel on appeal and has supplemented his motion with a brief, in compliance with Anders v. California, 1967, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493. The appellant has been advised by the Court of his right to respond to counsel’s motion by raising any points he contends are appealable. The appellant has failed to raise any such points.

Having carefully reviewed the entire record, which includes the full trial transcript, we find no arguable merit in the appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and dismiss the appeal under Local Rule 20. United States v. Mills, 5 Cir. 1971, 446 F.2d 1397; United States v. Minor, 5 Cir. 1971, 444 F.2d 521; Lemus v. Government of the Canal Zone, 5 Cir. 1971, 443 F.2d 23.

Dismissed.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Basilio Rudas L. Lemus v. The Government of the Canal Zone, No. 71-1144 Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part. I
443 F.2d 23 (Fifth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Charles Edward Minor, No. 30544 Summary Calendar. (1) Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409
444 F.2d 521 (Fifth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Johnny Lincoln Mills, No. 71-1219 Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5 Cir., Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York, 5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I
446 F.2d 1397 (Fifth Circuit, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
474 F.2d 1398, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-joseph-eugene-venable-ca5-1973.