Background
Joe Daniel Perez appealed from proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent him concluded that the appeal raised no nonfrivolous issue.
Appointed counsel 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). Perez 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.
Accordingly, the court granted counsel’s motion for leave 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 through an Anders brief after determining that a criminal appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The appellate court reviewed the brief and relevant portions of the record before accepting counsel’s assessment.
- The Fifth Circuit granted withdrawal and dismissed Perez’s appeal as frivolous under Rule 42.2.
Why It Matters
The unpublished per curiam opinion illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s procedure for resolving an appeal after appointed counsel files an Anders brief. Counsel’s assessment alone did not end the appeal; the panel conducted its own review before permitting withdrawal and dismissing the case.