United States v. Nino Rodriguez

618 F. App'x 226
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Nino Rodriguez. Read the opinion of the Court — 603 F. App'x 297
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 6, 2015·No. 14-40667·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Nino Rodriguez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs *227 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). Rodriguez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 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 Cíe. R. 42.2.

*

Pursuant to 5’th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Nino Rodriguez, 618 F. App'x 226 (5th Cir. 2015).

618 F. App'x 226 (United States v. Nino Rodriguez) — 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)