Court Opinion

ID: 6315952
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-02-19 01:00:23.513819+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:19.904344
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-40731     Document: 00516209091         Page: 1     Date Filed: 02/18/2022

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

                                                                       FILED
                                                                February 18, 2022
                                  No. 20-40731                    Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                       Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Gabriel Razo-Elizarraras,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 7:19-CR-1715-1

   Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Gabriel Razo-Elizarraras 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). Razo-Elizarraras 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-40731       Document: 00516209091        Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/18/2022

                                   No. 20-40731

   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. However, we disagree with counsel’s assertion
   that the statement of reasons should be modified to correct a purported
   clerical error.   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