Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John Allen WALTER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-03-09
Citations: 714 F. App'x 432
Docket Number: No. 16-41594 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John Allen WALTER, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before WIENER, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 714
Pages: 432–432

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John Allen WALTER, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-41594 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed March 9, 2018
John B. Ross, Assistant U.S. Attorney, John Albert Craft, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
John Allen Walter, Pro Se
Before WIENER, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent John Allen Walter 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). Walter has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Walter's claims of ineffective assistance of appellate 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 briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Walter's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel's motions for leave to withdraw are GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Walter's motion for appointment of new counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cm. R. 47.5.4,