UNITED STATES v. SMITH (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.2021-01-14No. No. 19-30913

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court granted counsel's motion to withdraw, excused counsel from further obligations, and dismissed the appeal.

Smith's appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw and submitted a brief following the procedure established in Anders v. California, arguing that the appeal lacked any nonfrivolous issues warranting appellate review. Smith filed a response to this motion. The court examined counsel's brief, the case record, and Smith's response, and agreed with counsel's conclusion that no viable appellate issues existed for consideration.

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

Key issues

Whether appellate counsel may withdraw when no nonfrivolous issues exist
Whether the record was sufficiently developed to evaluate claims of ineffective assistance of counsel
Whether any viable appellate issues existed for review

Procedural posture

Appellate counsel sought leave to withdraw from representation under Anders procedures, with Smith responding to the motion.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

The attorney appointed to represent Leroy Smith 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). Smith has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Smiths claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims 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 Smiths 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FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.