Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-13-11312/USCOURTS-ca5-13-11312-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Johnny Frank White
Appellant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-11312

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOHNNY FRANK WHITE,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-223-1

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Johnny Frank White has moved for 

leave to withdraw. He has filed a brief and a supplemental brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). White has responded to both of counsel’s briefs. In 

his second response, White requests an extension of time to retain counsel, 

seek substitution of retained counsel for his appointed attorney, and have his 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 13, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 13-11312 Document: 00513041464 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2015
No. 13-11312

retained counsel file a new brief. That motion is DENIED. See United States 

v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

To the extent White asserts that he was denied the effective assistance 

of counsel, the record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair 

evaluation of White’s claim. We therefore decline to consider the claim without 

prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 

(5th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as White’s responses. 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 CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 13-11312 Document: 00513041464 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2015