Court Opinion

ID: 4449546
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-10-24 00:00:18.37295+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:48.724160
License: Public Domain

Case: 19-10333      Document: 00515171213         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/23/2019

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                   United States Court of Appeals
                                                                            Fifth Circuit

                                    No. 19-10333                          FILED
                                                                    October 23, 2019
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                          Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MATTHEW WAYNE AUSTIN,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 2:18-CR-73-1

Before HAYNES, DUNCAN, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Matthew Wayne
Austin 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). Austin has filed a response. The record is not
sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Austin’s claim of
ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 19-10333     Document: 00515171213    Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/23/2019

                                 No. 19-10333

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 Austin’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.

                                       2