UNITED STATES v. CASEL (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.2021-05-26No. No. 20-10733

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court granted counsel's motion to withdraw and dismissed the appeal, finding that no nonfrivolous issues existed for appellate review.

Casel's appointed counsel sought permission to withdraw from the appeal and submitted a brief following the framework established in Anders v. California, which permits withdrawal when counsel finds no meritorious issues to raise. Casel responded to this motion. The court examined counsel's brief, the case record, and Casel's response to determine whether any legitimate appellate claims existed. The court found that the record lacked sufficient development to fairly assess Casel's claim of inadequate legal representation, so it declined to address that claim at this stage, leaving the door open for Casel to pursue it through post-conviction remedies.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Withdrawal of counsel on direct appeal
Absence of nonfrivolous appellate issues
Underdeveloped record for ineffective assistance claim
Preservation of collateral review rights

Procedural posture

On appeal, Casel's appointed counsel sought to withdraw after concluding the appeal presented no viable issues for review.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

The attorney appointed to represent Allen Dewayne Casel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Casel has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Casels claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsels brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Casels response. We concur with counsels assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the 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.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE

Per Curiam:*

FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.