United States v. Pablo Herrera-Espinosa

620 F. App'x 353
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 27, 2015
Docket13-20535
StatusUnpublished

This text of 620 F. App'x 353 (United States v. Pablo Herrera-Espinosa) 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. Pablo Herrera-Espinosa, 620 F. App'x 353 (5th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

STEPHEN A. HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge: *

The attorney appointed to represent Pablo Edmundo Herrera-Espinosa. (“Herrera-Espinosa”) has moved for 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), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Herrera-Espinosa filed a timely response.

Herrera-Espinosa pled guilty to illegally re-entering the United States following deportation after a felony conviction. On September 6, 2013, the district court sentenced him to thirty (30) months imprisonment followed by three (3) years of supervised release. Herrera-Espinosa was removed from the United States on June 30, 2015. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Herrera-Es-pinosa’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Because Herrera-Espinosa has completed the confinement portion of his sentence, any argument that the prison term should be reduced is moot. See United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 382 (5th Cir.2007).

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the. APPEAL IS DISMISSED in part as frivolous, see 5th Cir. R. 42.2, and in part as moot. See Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d at 382-83.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

Related

United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis
483 F.3d 381 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)
Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Flores
632 F.3d 229 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
620 F. App'x 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-pablo-herrera-espinosa-ca5-2015.