Court Opinion

ID: 3148616
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-22 20:01:08.678983+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:55:00.707514
License: Public Domain

Case: 14-20367      Document: 00513242411         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/22/2015

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 14-20367
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                         October 22, 2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LENYN ACOSTA,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:13-CR-364-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Lenyn Acosta has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Acosta has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow us
to make a fair evaluation of Acosta’s claim of ineffective assistance of appellate
counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to such

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 14-20367     Document: 00513242411     Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/22/2015

                                  No. 14-20367

right as Acosta may have 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 brief and the relevant parts of the record
reflected therein, as well as Acosta’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 CIR. R. 42.2. The motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED.

                                        2