USA v. Ernest McCarty
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-51040 Dismissed as Frivolous 13-51136 Dismissed as Frivolous ] Judge: CDK , Judge: EBC , Judge: PRO Mandate pull date is 08/07/2015 for Appellant Ernest Lee McCarty; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. John Anthony Peralta, Esq. [7609984-2] in 13-51040, granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. John Anthony Peralta, Esq. [7638425-2] in 13-51136 [13-51040, 13-51136]
Case: 13-51040
Document: 00513120055
Page: 1
Date Filed: 07/17/2015
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-51040
c/w No. 13-51136
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
July 17, 2015
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
ERNEST LEE MCCARTY,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 7:13-CR-50-6
USDC No. 7:13-CR-148-1
Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Ernest Lee McCarty has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
McCarty has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the
relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as McCarty’s response.
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-51040
Document: 00513120055
Page: 2
Date Filed: 07/17/2015
No. 13-51040
c/w No. 13-51136
We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeals present no nonfrivolous
issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, counsel’s motions for leave to
withdraw are GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities
herein, and the APPEALS ARE 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?