You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

United States v. Herrera-Geronimo

Citation: 203 F. App'x 667Docket: No. 05-41812

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; October 25, 2006; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The Federal Public Defender appointed for Alvaro Herrera-Geronimo moved to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California, indicating no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Herrera was informed of his right to respond but did not do so. An independent review confirmed the absence of appealable issues. Consequently, the court granted counsel's motion to withdraw, excused them from further responsibilities, and dismissed the appeal. The opinion is not to be published and holds no precedential weight, except under specified limited circumstances.

Legal Issues Addressed

Anders Brief Submission

Application: The Federal Public Defender submitted an Anders brief, asserting that there were no nonfrivolous issues for appeal in Herrera's case.

Reasoning: The Federal Public Defender appointed for Alvaro Herrera-Geronimo moved to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California, indicating no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Independent Appellate Review

Application: The court conducted an independent review and confirmed the absence of appealable issues in the case.

Reasoning: An independent review confirmed the absence of appealable issues.

Motion to Withdraw by Counsel

Application: The court granted the motion for the Federal Public Defender to withdraw from the case after confirming no appealable issues.

Reasoning: Consequently, the court granted counsel's motion to withdraw, excused them from further responsibilities, and dismissed the appeal.

Non-Precedential Status of Opinion

Application: The court's opinion in this case is not published and does not hold precedential value except in limited circumstances.

Reasoning: The opinion is not to be published and holds no precedential weight, except under specified limited circumstances.

Right to Respond to Anders Brief

Application: Herrera was informed of his right to respond to the Anders brief but chose not to do so.

Reasoning: Herrera was informed of his right to respond but did not do so.