Testo completo
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-21107
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MARIO NARCISCO ALMANZA-DEHOYOS, also known
as Mario Narciso Almanza, also known as
Mario Jarcisco Almanza-DeHoyos, also known
as Mario N Dehoyes, also known as Mario
Narcisco Almanza-DeHoyuos,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-99-CR-266-ALL
--------------------
August 9, 2000
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario
Narciso Almanza-DeHoyos has moved for leave to withdraw and has
filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967). Almanza-DeHoyos has received a copy of counsel’s motion
and brief. Although he requested and was granted extensions of
time to file a response, Almanza-DeHoyos failed to file a
response to the motion to withdraw. Our independent review of
-- 1 of 2 --
No. 99-21107
-2-
counsel’s brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue.
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 of 2 --
