USA v. Eric Coline, No. 15-20234 (5th Cir. 2017)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-20234 Document: 00513940362 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-20234 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 5, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ERIC COLINE, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:13-CR-406-2 Before JOLLY, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Eric Coline has moved for leave to withdraw on the ground that there is no nonfrivolous issue for appeal, in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel’s motion satisfies the requirements for Anders briefs. See id.; United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Coline has filed a response. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-20234 Document: 00513940362 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2017 No. 15-20234 We have reviewed counsel’s motion and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Coline’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. However, contrary to counsel’s assertion, the judgment contains no clerical error. 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. Coline’s motion for appointment of new counsel or, alternatively, for leave to proceed pro se is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902–03 (5th Cir. 1998). Coline’s motion to supplement the record on appeal and to place the record on appeal under seal is also DENIED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.