Case ID: f-appx_564/html/0060-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Antonio De Jesus MOLINA-ORTEGA, also known as Tony K. Molina, also known as Antonio De Jesus Ortega-Molina, also known as Martin M. Contreras, also known as Tony Molina, also known as Antonio Dejesus Molina-Ortega, also known as Karrel Ortega, also known as Karvel Ortega, also known as Javier Salas, also known as Joseph Shokrian, also known as Joseph H. Shokrian, also known as Karvell Ortega, also known as Karel Ortega, also known as Antonio D. Molina-Ortega, also known as Antonio Jesus Molina-Ortega, also known as Martin Contreras, also known as Aniceto Molina, also known as Johnnie Molina, also known as Antonio Ortega, also known as Antonio Molina, also known as Antonio Karel Molina, also known as Antonio Molina-Ortega, also known as Joseph Hassan Shokrian, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-50367
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    April 16, 2014.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Antonio De Jesus Molina-Ortega, Eden, TX, pro se.
    Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Antonio De Jesus Molina-Ortega 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). Molina-Ortega has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Molina-Ortega’s response. 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 Cir. R. 42.2. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.