Court Opinion

ID: 4020780
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-08-02 18:00:51.619016+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:11.285917
License: Public Domain

Case: 15-41091      Document: 00513619229         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/02/2016

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 15-41091
                                  Summary Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                           August 2, 2016
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee,

versus

ALFREDO CANDANOZA-RUIZ,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:14-CR-954-1

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alfredo Candanoza-

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 15-41091    Document: 00513619229     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/02/2016

                                 No. 15-41091

Ruiz 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). Candanoza-Ruiz has filed a response. We have reviewed
counsel’s brief, relevant portions of the record reflected therein, and
Candanoza-Ruiz’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
responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

                                       2