The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

United States v. Juan Velasquez-Ramirez

15-40675·Judge: Davis, Smith, Prado·Attorney: Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee,, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Philip G. Gallagher, Scott Andrew Martin, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant., Juan Velasquez-Ramirez, Folkston, GA, pro se.0 citations

No summary available for this case.

Opinions

Case: 15-40675 Document: 00513383624 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2016

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40675 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED February 17, 2016 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN VELASQUEZ-RAMIREZ, also known as German Velasquez-Ramirez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 6:09-CR-13-1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan VelasquezRamirez 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). Velasquez-Ramirez 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

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-40675 Document: 00513383624 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2016

No. 15-40675

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