Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Alberto PEREZ-CASTILLO, also known as Alberto Castillo-Perez, also known as Arnulfo Casas Rico, also known as Jesus Carrillo, also known as Alberto Perez-Castillo, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-02-18
Citations: 310 F. App'x 717
Docket Number: No. 07-11091
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Alberto PEREZ-CASTILLO, also known as Alberto Castillo-Perez, also known as Arnulfo Casas Rico, also known as Jesus Carrillo, also known as Alberto Perez-Castillo, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 310
Pages: 717–717

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Alberto PEREZ-CASTILLO, also known as Alberto Castillo-Perez, also known as Arnulfo Casas Rico, also known as Jesus Carrillo, also known as Alberto Perez-Castillo, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-11091
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 18, 2009.
Juan Carlos Rodriguez, U.S. District Court, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Charles M. Bleil, Federal Public Defender’s Office Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Alberto Perez-Castillo 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). Perez-Castillo has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel's brief 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.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.