United States v. Charles Johnson

670 F. App'x 879
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Charles Johnson. Read the opinion of the Court — 558 F. App'x 450
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided November 28, 2016·No. 16-30049 Summary Calendar·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Charles Johnson 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). Johnson has filed a response. The record is not suffi *880 ciently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Johnson’s 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). Johnson’s motion for the appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED.

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record referenced therein, as well as Johnson’s response. We concur with counsel’s 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.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

United States v. Charles Johnson, 670 F. App'x 879 (5th Cir. 2016).

670 F. App'x 879 (United States v. Charles Johnson) — 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)
United States v. Gilbert Isgar
739 F.3d 829 (Fifth Circuit, 2014)