Background
John Marcus Lee appealed from proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Fifth Circuit’s unpublished summary-calendar opinion does not describe his conviction, sentence, or potential appellate claims.
Lee’s appointed 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. Lee did not file a response.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit 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 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 may seek withdrawal by filing an Anders brief when counsel concludes that an appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s submission and the relevant portions of the record before accepting that assessment.
- The court permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed Lee’s appeal as frivolous under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s procedure for resolving a criminal appeal after appointed counsel files an Anders brief. Counsel’s assessment alone did not end the case; the panel conducted its own review before allowing withdrawal and dismissing the appeal.