United States v. Rodgers

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS February 13, 2004 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk

No. 02-21178 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CEDRICK RODGERS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-01-CV-2105 USDC No. H-99-CR-737-2

Before JONES, BENAVIDES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Larry Chris Iles, court-appointed counsel for Cedrick

Rodgers, has filed a motion for leave to withdraw as counsel

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting

that Rodgers’s appeal does not present a nonfrivolous issue. See

Dinkins v. Alabama, 526 F.2d 1268, 1269 (5th Cir. 1976). Rodgers

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. has filed a response to counsel’s motion, arguing that his appeal

raises nonfrivolous claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Our independent review of counsel’s Anders brief,

Rodgers’s response and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue

for appeal. 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. The request for

a COA, requested implicitly by the notice of appeal, is DENIED.