Case ID: f-appx_102/html/0431-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Willard Barry LIVELY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-51045.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided July 16, 2004.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Willard Barry Lively, Bastrop, TX, pro se.
    Before SMITH, DeMOSS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Private counsel appointed to represent Willard Barry Lively has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Lively has filed a response to counsel’s motion. Lively’s claims alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel are not cognizable in the instant appeal. See United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir.1987).

Our independent review of the brief, response, suppression hearing, jury trial, sentencing, and record discloses no non-frivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Lively’s motion to allow counsel to withdraw is DENIED as moot.

COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; LIVELY’S MOTION TO ALLOW COUNSEL TO WITHDRAW DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.