Court Opinion

ID: 6338138
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-05-05 18:00:27.943899+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:25:09.592486
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-40791      Document: 00516308228         Page: 1     Date Filed: 05/05/2022

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

                                                                         FILED
                                                                      May 5, 2022
                                  No. 21-40791
                                                                    Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                         Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                              Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Ricardo Salazar-Razo,

                                                           Defendant—Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Southern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 1:21-CR-521-1

   Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ricardo Salazar-
   Razo 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). Salazar-Razo 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-40791     Document: 00516308228          Page: 2   Date Filed: 05/05/2022

                                   No. 21-40791

   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