Background
Sean Burns appealed from a criminal case 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 and United States v. Flores, representing that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for review.
Burns did not file a response to counsel’s 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 Burns’s appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
The court granted counsel’s motion 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 through an Anders brief when counsel concludes that a criminal appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record before accepting that assessment.
- Because the court found no nonfrivolous appellate issue, it permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed Burns’s appeal.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s handling of an unopposed Anders submission: the court conducts its own review before allowing appointed counsel to withdraw and dismissing an appeal as frivolous.
The unpublished opinion does not address the merits of Burns’s conviction or sentence in detail; its holding is limited to the absence of a nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.