Background
Mark Alan Valles appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent him concluded that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue and sought permission to withdraw.
Appointed counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California and United States v. Flores, identifying the relevant portions of the record for appellate review. Valles did not file a response.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record described 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 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 who concludes that a criminal appeal lacks any nonfrivolous issue may seek withdrawal through the Anders procedure.
- The appellate court reviewed the brief and relevant record materials before agreeing that no nonfrivolous appellate issue existed.
- The Fifth Circuit granted withdrawal and dismissed Valles’s appeal as frivolous.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s handling of an unopposed Anders submission: the court conducts its own review of the materials identified by counsel rather than relying solely on counsel’s conclusion. When that review reveals no nonfrivolous issue, the court may permit counsel to withdraw and dismiss the appeal.