U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 2016

United States v. Jose Estrada-Carrizales

United States v. Jose Estrada-Carrizales
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided December 12, 2016 · Higginbotham, Prado, Haynes
671 F. App'x 303

United States v. Jose Estrada-Carrizales

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Estrada-Carrizales has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 1 Estrada-Carrizales has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo-lous 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.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. We conclude that the Court's decision in Mathis v. United States, — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 2243, 195 L.Ed.2d 604 (2016), issued after the FPD filed its brief, does not necessitate further briefing regarding the analysis of Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 644(D)(1).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.