Court Opinion

ID: 4681508
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-04-28 00:00:26.13235+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:12:35.999756
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-50021     Document: 00515838255         Page: 1     Date Filed: 04/27/2021

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

                                                                       FILED
                                                                   April 27, 2021
                                  No. 20-50021
                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
                               Conference Calendar                     Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Erik Vega,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC No. 3:19-CR-2379-1

   Before Davis, Elrod, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Erik Vega 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).
   Vega has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-50021     Document: 00515838255         Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/27/2021

                                  No. 20-50021

   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