Court Opinion

ID: 6320254
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-04 19:00:32.330747+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:25.454093
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-20485     Document: 00516224684         Page: 1     Date Filed: 03/04/2022

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                                                            FILED
                                                                        March 4, 2022
                                  No. 21-20485                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                            Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Carlos Enrique Sub-Botzoc,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 4:21-CR-216-1

   Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos Enrique
   Sub-Botzoc 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). Sub-Botzoc has not filed a response.

          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-20485     Document: 00516224684         Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/04/2022

                                  No. 21-20485

   We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
   reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
   presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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.

                                       2