USA v. Elvin Benites-Benite

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-41367 Dismissed as Frivolous 14-41370 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: CDK , Judge: EBC , Judge: PRO Mandate pull date is 09/03/2015 for Appellant Elvin Benites-Benites; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Scott Andrew Martin [7876480-2] [14-41367, 14-41370]

Download PDF
Case: 14-41367 Document: 00513153176 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/13/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-41367 c/w No. 14-41370 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 13, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ELVIN BENITES-BENITES, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:14-CR-530-1 USDC No. 5:14-CR-930-1 Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Elvin BenitesBenites 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). Benites-Benites has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 14-41367 Document: 00513153176 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/13/2015 No. 14-41367 c/w No. 14-41370 therein, as well as Benites-Benites’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeals present 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 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?