Court Opinion

ID: 2762512
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-12-18 19:00:39.991419+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:17:27.622926
License: Public Domain

Case: 14-40248      Document: 00512874826         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/18/2014

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 14-40248
                                  Summary Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                        December 18, 2014
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff−Appellee,

versus

MATTHEW OJEDA,

                                                 Defendant−Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:13-CR-89-1

Before SMITH, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

       The attorney appointed to represent Matthew Ojeda has moved for leave

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 14-40248    Document: 00512874826    Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/18/2014

                                No. 14-40248

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Ojeda has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief, relevant portions
of the record reflected therein, and Ojeda’s response. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, the 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.

                                      2