Court Opinion

ID: 43738
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 22:00:00+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:04.397795
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                  Fifth Circuit
                                                               F I L E D
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  June 21, 2006

                                                            Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                    Clerk
                              No. 05-20205
                          Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RUBEN TORRES-MARTINEZ,

                                      Defendant-Appellant.

                         --------------------
             Appeal from the United States District Court
                  for the Southern District of Texas
                        USDC No. 4:04-CR-274-1
                         --------------------

Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Court-appointed counsel for Ruben Torres-Martinez (Torres)

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required

by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).     In response,

Torres requests the appointment of new counsel to represent him

on appeal.     Our independent review of the brief, the response,

and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, the

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
                           No. 05-20205
                                -2-

APPEAL IS DISMISSED, and the motion for appointment of new

counsel is DENIED.   See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.