Background
Santiago Daniel Baltazar appealed from a criminal proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. His appointed appellate attorney moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Baltazar did not file a response to counsel’s motion or Anders brief. The Fifth Circuit reviewed counsel’s submission and the relevant portions of the record identified in it.
The Court’s Holding
The court agreed with appointed counsel that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. It therefore granted counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw and excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case.
The court dismissed Baltazar’s appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2. The per curiam opinion was not designated for publication.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney may seek to withdraw by filing an Anders brief when counsel concludes that an appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record before accepting that assessment.
- Finding no nonfrivolous appellate issue, the court permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed the appeal.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s handling of an uncontested Anders submission: the court conducts its own review of the materials presented before allowing appointed counsel to withdraw and dismissing the appeal as frivolous.