USA v. Victor Barahona-Diaz


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-41223 Dismissed as Frivolous ] Judge: CDK , Judge: EGJ , Judge: JEG Mandate pull date is 08/30/2011 for Appellant Victor Barahona-Diaz; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Ms. Margaret Christina Ling [6771818-2] [10-41223]

Download PDF
Case: 10-41223 Document: 00511566844 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-41223 Summary Calendar August 9, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. VICTOR BARAHONA-DIAZ, also known as Francis Arnoldo Martinez-Portillo, also known as Nelson Montesino, also known as Israel Torres-Pagan, also known as Raul Diaz Arce, also known as Victor Diaz, also known as Israel Pagan Torres, also known as Diablo Chavery, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-684-1 Before KING, JOLLY, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Victor Barahona-Diaz 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). Barahona-Diaz has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 10-41223 Document: 00511566844 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2011 No. 10-41223 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

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?