USA v. Marco Antonio Hernandez-Espinoza, No. 09-15090 (11th Cir. 2010)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT MAY 13, 2010 JOHN LEY CLERK No. 09-15090 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D. C. Docket No. 09-00159-CR-5-RDP-PWG UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MARCO ANTONIO HERNANDEZ-ESPINOZA, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _________________________ (May 13, 2010) Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: John M. Kennemer, appointed counsel for Marco Antonio HernandezEspinoza in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Kennemer s brief asserts nothing more than a bare conclusion that Hernandez-Espinoza s appeal lacks merit, citing no authority to support his view that the appeal is frivolous. The brief falls far short of the Anders protocol. See id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400 (after a conscientious examination of the case, the attorney must submit a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal ); see also United States v. Blackwell, 767 F.2d 1486, 1487 88 (11th Cir. 1985) (the Anders brief must point out any irregularities in the trial process or other potential error which, although in his judgment not a basis for appellate relief, might, in the judgment of his client or another counselor or the court, be arguably meritorious ) (emphasis in original). Nonetheless, our independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguably meritorious issues. Accordingly, counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Hernandez-Espinoza s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. 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.