Court Opinion

ID: 4413875
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-07-03 18:00:22.132294+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:49:13.115874
License: Public Domain

Case: 19-40035      Document: 00515021251        Page: 1     Date Filed: 07/03/2019

          IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                   FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                    No. 19-40035                                FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                         July 3, 2019
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                Plaintiff−Appellee,

versus

CARLOS ALBERTO ORTIZ-MACIAS,

                                                Defendant−Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:18-CR-539-1

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

      The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos Ortiz-Macias

      * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in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: 19-40035    Document: 00515021251    Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/03/2019

                                No. 19-40035

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief per Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Ortiz-Macias has filed a response.

      We have reviewed counsel’s brief, relevant portions of the record, and
Ortiz-Macias’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion
for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsi-
bilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

                                      2