Court Opinion

ID: 5175658
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-03 19:00:22.31675+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:26:17.131770
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-10512     Document: 00516150957         Page: 1     Date Filed: 01/03/2022

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

                                                                             FILED
                                  No. 21-10512                         January 3, 2022
                                Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                             Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Felix Guillen,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 3:19-CR-630-12

   Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Felix Guillen 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).
   Guillen has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-10512     Document: 00516150957         Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/03/2022

                                  No. 21-10512

   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