Court Opinion

ID: 6352761
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-06-23 00:00:23.990848+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:49:34.814819
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-40859      Document: 00516366427         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/22/2022

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

                                                                             FILED
                                                                         June 22, 2022
                                  No. 21-40859                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                             Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Othoniel Ivan Pulido-Yanez,

                                                          Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 7:21-CR-1508-1

   Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Othoniel Ivan
   Pulido-Yanez 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). Pulido-Yanez 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-40859     Document: 00516366427         Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/22/2022

                                  No. 21-40859

   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