Court Opinion

ID: 4300173
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-08-02 00:00:19.106223+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:42:13.371083
License: Public Domain

Case: 18-20041      Document: 00514581678         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/01/2018

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 18-20041                                FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                       August 1, 2018
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

OSMARLIN VARELA OVIEDO,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:17-CR-577-1

Before KING, ELROD, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Osmarlin Varela
Oviedo 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). Defendant Varela Oviedo has not filed a response. We
have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-20041    Document: 00514581678     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/01/2018

                                 No. 18-20041

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