Case ID: f-appx_532/html/0526-01.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. Robert C. GREEN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-31216
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    April 17, 2013.
    Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Myers P. Namie, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Robert C. Green, USP Lewisburg, Lewisburg, PA, pro se.
    Before JONES, DENNIS, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Robert C. Green has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Green has filed a response.

In his response, Green alleges that his request for a new counsel should have been granted and that his attorney failed to make “simple but very, very important objection[s].” To the extent that this allegation is an effort to raise an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, we conclude that the record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of such a claim. See United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir.2006).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Green’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.