USA v. Jesus Sandoval


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-10606 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: PEH , Judge: EMG , Judge: LHS Mandate pull date is 03/09/2012 for Appellant Jesus Sandoval; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Douglas Hugh Schopmeyer, Esq. [6904157-2]; denying motion to appoint counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Jesus Sandoval [6721886-3] [10-10606]

Download PDF
Case: 10-10606 Document: 00511761523 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-10606 Conference Calendar February 17, 2012 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JESUS SANDOVAL, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:10-CR-25-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Jesus Sandoval 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). Sandoval has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Sandoval’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 10-10606 Document: 00511761523 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2012 No. 10-10606 is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Sandoval’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998). 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?