Background
Luciano Flores-Jimenez appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The Fifth Circuit considered the matter on its summary calendar.
Flores-Jimenez’s appointed Federal Public Defender moved for leave to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California and United States v. Flores, representing that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous basis for review. Flores-Jimenez did not file a response.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record identified in it. The court agreed with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
The court therefore granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case, and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney who concludes that a criminal appeal lacks a nonfrivolous issue may seek withdrawal through the Anders procedure.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed the relevant record and independently agreed that no nonfrivolous appellate issue existed.
- The court allowed counsel to withdraw and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Why It Matters
The unpublished decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s handling of an uncontested Anders submission: the court conducts its own review before permitting appointed counsel to withdraw and dismissing the appeal.
For criminal appellate practitioners, the opinion also confirms that dismissal may follow when that review reveals no nonfrivolous issue warranting further appellate proceedings.