Background
Moises Mendez-Martinez appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent him moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California and United States v. Flores, indicating that counsel found no nonfrivolous ground for appeal.
Mendez-Martinez 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 Fifth Circuit agreed with appointed counsel that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. The court therefore granted counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw and excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case.
The court dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2, which permits dismissal of frivolous appeals. The per curiam opinion was designated as unpublished.
Key Takeaways
- The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed the Anders brief and relevant record before determining that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue.
- The court granted appointed counsel permission to withdraw and ended counsel’s further responsibilities in the matter.
- The appeal was dismissed as frivolous under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s procedure when appointed criminal-defense counsel concludes that an appeal lacks any nonfrivolous issue. Counsel’s Anders filing does not itself terminate the case; the appellate court must conduct its own review before permitting withdrawal and dismissing the appeal.