Case ID: f-appx_402/html/0944-01.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. Leo LOSTON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-31099
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 23, 2010.
    Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Betty Lee Marak, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Shreveport, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Leo Loston, Oakdale, LA, pro se.
    Before JOLLY, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Leo Loston 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). Loston has filed a response in which he argues that the district court erred in denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion because he is eligible for relief under Amendment 706 to the Sentencing Guidelines and because relief was warranted. Loston also seeks the appointment of new counsel. Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Loston’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, Loston’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED, 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.