Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Vicente GONZALEZ-BAUTISTA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-10
Citations: 133 F. App'x 974
Docket Number: No. 04-41188
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Vicente GONZALEZ-BAUTISTA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 133
Pages: 974–974

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Vicente GONZALEZ-BAUTISTA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-41188.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided June 10, 2005.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Vicente Gonzalez-Bautista, Eden, TX, pro se.
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Vicente Gonzales-Bautista on appeal has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Gonzales, who pleaded guilty to unlawfully reentering the United States following a prior deportation, received a copy of counsel's motion and filed a response, asserting that (1) his counsel was ineffective for failing to seek a downward departure based on cultural assimilation; (2) the district court erred in informing him of the maximum penalty for unlawful reentry when he pleaded guilty; and (3) his sentence is unlawful in light of United States v. Booker, — U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).
Our independent review of the brief, the response and the record discloses no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Counsel's motion for leave to withdraw is granted, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the appeal is dismissed.
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir..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.