United States v. Vasquez
United States v. Vasquez
Opinion
Case: 23-10900 Document: 61-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/14/2025
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-10900 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ February 14, 2025 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Marc Anthony Vasquez, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:23-CR-8-1 ______________________________ Before Graves, Willett, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: * The attorney appointed to represent Marc Anthony Vasquez 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). Vasquez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10900 Document: 61-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/14/2025
No. 23-10900
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.
Notwithstanding our agreement with counsel, we note that a judge of this court previously ordered counsel to cure the inadequacies in his initial Anders brief by, inter alia, discussing the validity of the appeal waiver, including whether any exception to the waiver provision applies. The conclusory and inadequate discussion of that issue in counsel’s supplemental brief fails to comply with this court’s order or with his obligations under United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229, 232-33 (5th Cir. 2011). Counsel is accordingly WARNED that the failure to comply with this court’s orders in the future will invite the imposition of sanctions, including denial of payment for services rendered and removal from the case.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.