Case ID: f-appx_653/html/0266-01.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. Eileen Beth PRUITT, Defendant-Appellant
    No. 15-40476
    Conference Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Date Filed: 06/21/2016
    Ernest Gonzalez, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Texas, Plano, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Eileen Pruitt, Marlin, TX, Pro Se.
    Before JONES, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Eileen Beth Pruitt has moved for leave to ■withdraw and has filed a brief 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). Pruitt has filed a response! The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Pruitt’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir, R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.