USA v. Ernest McCarty


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED.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]

Download PDF
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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?