Court Opinion

ID: 4197019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-08-18 00:01:02.372511+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:56.124689
License: Public Domain

Case: 16-41541      Document: 00514120903         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/17/2017

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                 Fifth Circuit

                                    No. 16-41541                               FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                       August 17, 2017
                                                                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff−Appellee,

versus

MARIO ANTONIO PINEDA-BOJORQUEZ, Also Known as Angel Bautista,

                                                 Defendant−Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 7:16-CR-669-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario Pineda-

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-41541   Document: 00514120903     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/17/2017

                                No. 16-41541

Bojorquez has moved for leave 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). Pineda-Bojorquez has not filed a response.

     We have reviewed counsel’s brief and relevant portions of the record. 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