United States v. Brooks

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Brooks. Read the opinion of the Court — 78 F.4th 138
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 2, 2023·No. 22-50241·Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 22-50241 Document: 00516633353 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/02/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

No. 22-50241 FILED February 2, 2023 Summary Calendar ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Freeman Lamont Brooks,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:21-CR-231-4 ______________________________

Before Jolly, Jones, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Freeman Lamont Brooks has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Brooks has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 22-50241 Document: 00516633353 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/02/2023

No. 22-50241

reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Brooks, (5th Cir. 2023).

United States v. Brooks (United States v. Brooks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Flores
632 F.3d 229 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)