United States v. Daniels

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Daniels. Read the opinion of the Court — 77 F.4th 337
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided December 5, 2025·No. 25-10802·Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 25-10802 Document: 39-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/05/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED December 5, 2025 No. 25-10802 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ____________

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Brack Earl Daniels,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:22-CR-24-1 ______________________________

Before Wiener, Willett, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Brack Earl Daniels 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). Daniels has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-10802 Document: 39-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/05/2025

No. 25-10802

well as Daniels’s response. 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. Daniels, (5th Cir. 2025).

United States v. Daniels (United States v. Daniels) — 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)