United States v. Washington

Opinion

Case: 25-30428 Document: 53-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/14/2026

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

FILED No. 25-30428 May 14, 2026 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Lionell Washington,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:23-CR-119-1 ______________________________

Before Jones, Duncan, and Douglas, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * The attorney appointed to represent Lionell Washington 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). Washington has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Washington’s claims of

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-30428 Document: 53-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/14/2026

No. 25-30428

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 counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Washington’s response. It is dispositive that the Government has declined to waive the untimeliness of Washington’s appeal. See United States v. Pesina-Rodriguez, 825 F.3d 787, 788 (5th Cir. 2016). 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. Washington’s pro se motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED as untimely. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902–03 (5th Cir. 1998).