Court Opinion

ID: 4401116
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-05-29 00:00:23.194646+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:34:25.614889
License: Public Domain

Case: 18-10621      Document: 00514973652         Page: 1    Date Filed: 05/28/2019

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 18-10621                      United States Court of Appeals

                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                               Fifth Circuit

                                                                             FILED
                                                                         May 28, 2019
                                                                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                             Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff−Appellee,

versus

BRUCE TRENSHEL DAVIS, also known as “Wheatie,”

                                                 Defendant−Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                                No. 4:17-CR-264-4

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

       The attorney appointed to represent Bruce Davis has moved for leave to

       * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 18-10621    Document: 00514973652     Page: 2   Date Filed: 05/28/2019

                                 No. 18-10621

withdraw and has filed briefs per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Davis has not filed
a response.

      We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the
record. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no non-
frivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to with-
draw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,
and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

                                       2