Court Opinion

ID: 6345124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-05-30 00:00:26.473552+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:49:19.822775
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-10080      Document: 00516335822         Page: 1     Date Filed: 05/27/2022

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

                                                                          FILED
                                                                      May 27, 2022
                                  No. 22-10080
                                Summary Calendar                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                          Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                              Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   David Lee Martinez,

                                                           Defendant—Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:20-CR-351-1

   Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent David Lee
   Martinez 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). Martinez has not filed a response. We have

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 22-10080    Document: 00516335822          Page: 2   Date Filed: 05/27/2022

                                  No. 22-10080

   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