Court Opinion

ID: 6326612
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-24 18:00:23.339093+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:14.447023
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-10709     Document: 00516251914         Page: 1     Date Filed: 03/24/2022

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

                                                                              FILED
                                  No. 21-10709                          March 24, 2022
                                Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Mario Hernandez, Jr.,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                          USDC No. 4:20-CR-339-24

   Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Mario Hernandez, Jr., 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). Hernandez 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-10709     Document: 00516251914          Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/24/2022

                                   No. 21-10709

   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