USA v. Antonio Gaona-Gaona
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-40662 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: CDK , Judge: EGJ , Judge: CH. Mandate pull date is 05/01/2015 for Appellant Antonio Gaona-Gaona; denying motion to substitute counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Antonio Gaona-Gaona [7810340-3]; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Omar Weaver Rosales [7798502-2] [14-40662]
Case: 14-40662
Document: 00513001667
Page: 1
Date Filed: 04/10/2015
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-40662
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
April 10, 2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
v.
ANTONIO GAONA-GAONA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:13-CR-816-1
Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Antonio Gaona-Gaona 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). Gaona-Gaona has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s
brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as GaonaGaona’s response.
We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-40662
Document: 00513001667
Page: 2
Date Filed: 04/10/2015
No. 14-40662
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.
Gaona-Gaona’s motion for appointment of new counsel on appeal is DENIED.
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?