USA v. Julio Arias-Barron
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-20162 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: JES , Judge: EBC , Judge: GJC. Mandate pull date is 07/11/2017 for Appellant Julio Alejandro Arias-Barron; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Michael Lance Herman [8223939-2] [16-20162]
Case: 16-20162
Document: 00514041166
Page: 1
Date Filed: 06/20/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-20162
Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 20, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JULIO ALEJANDRO ARIAS-BARRON, also known as Julio Alejandro Arias
Barron, also known as Julio Arias-Barron, also known as Alejandro GomezBarron, also known as Julio Alejandro Arias, also known as Alejandro Arias,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:15-CR-601-1
Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Julio Alejandro
Arias-Barron 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). Arias-Barron has not filed a response.
We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-20162
Document: 00514041166
Page: 2
Date Filed: 06/20/2017
No. 16-20162
reflected therein.
We concur with 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?