Court Opinion

ID: 4702622
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-07-09 21:00:23.742434+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:06:26.035399
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-10209     Document: 00515932114         Page: 1     Date Filed: 07/09/2021

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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                         July 9, 2021
                                  No. 20-10209                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                            Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Gustavo Ruiz Mendoza,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 3:18-CR-363-2

   Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Gustavo Ruiz Mendoza 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). Ruiz Mendoza has not filed a response. We have reviewed

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-10209     Document: 00515932114          Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/09/2021

                                   No. 20-10209

   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