Background
Wilfido Venamar Luargas De La Fuente appealed from proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern 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).
Luargas De La Fuente did not file a response to counsel’s motion or 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, excused counsel from further responsibilities in the matter, and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney may seek withdrawal by filing an Anders brief when counsel concludes that a criminal appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed the brief and the relevant portions of the record before accepting counsel’s assessment.
- Finding no nonfrivolous appellate issue, the court permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.
Why It Matters
The unpublished summary-calendar opinion illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s procedure for resolving an Anders appeal. Counsel’s conclusion alone did not dispose of the case; the panel conducted its own review before allowing withdrawal and dismissing the appeal.