Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos Jair SOLIS-VIVEROS, also known as Carlos J. Solis, also known as Carlos Solis-Viveros, also known as Carlos Solis-Rivero, also known as Carlos Jair Solis-Rivero, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-04-20
Citations: 375 F. App'x 397
Docket Number: No. 09-20222
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos Jair SOLIS-VIVEROS, also known as Carlos J. Solis, also known as Carlos Solis-Viveros, also known as Carlos Solis-Rivero, also known as Carlos Jair Solis-Rivero, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SMITH, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 375
Pages: 397–398

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos Jair SOLIS-VIVEROS, also known as Carlos J. Solis, also known as Carlos Solis-Viveros, also known as Carlos Solis-Rivero, also known as Carlos Jair Solis-Rivero, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-20222
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 20, 2010.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Lourdes Rodriguez, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before SMITH, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Caídos Jair Solis-Viveros 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). Solis-Viveros has been deported from the United States and has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel's brief discloses no non-frivolous 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 in part as frivolous, see 5th Cir. R. 42.2, and in part as moot. See United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 383 (5th Cir.2007).
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.