United States v. Kentrell Washington

540 F. App'x 451
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Kentrell Washington. Read the opinion of the Court — 442 F. App'x 130
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 9, 2013·No. 12-30959·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Kentrell Washington 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), *452 and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Washington has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Washington’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir.2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Washington’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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Kentrell Washington, 540 F. App'x 451 (5th Cir. 2013).

540 F. App'x 451 (United States v. Kentrell Washington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Cantwell
470 F.3d 1087 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Flores
632 F.3d 229 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)