United States v. Octavio Jimenez

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 27, 2017·No. 16-10703·Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 16-10703 Document: 00513926968 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/27/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 16-10703 FILED Summary Calendar March 27, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

OCTAVIO COLIN JIMENEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15-CR-153-7

Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Octavio Colin Jimenez 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). Colin Jimenez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We agree with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 16-10703 Document: 00513926968 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/27/2017

No. 16-10703

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.

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

United States v. Octavio Jimenez, (5th Cir. 2017).

United States v. Octavio Jimenez (United States v. Octavio Jimenez) — 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)